In re: David Smith
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000095971-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000078301-2] Originating case number: 5:17-ct-03087-D Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [17-1610]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
In re: DAVID LEE SMITH,
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Submitted: September 28, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Lee Smith, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Decided: October 2, 2017
Pg: 2 of 2
David Lee Smith petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the
district court to investigate an alleged conspiracy between two district court judges and
Lexis Publishing. Smith also seeks an order reducing his state sentence to time served.
We conclude that Smith is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v.
Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Mandamus relief is available only
when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan
Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for
appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Further, this
court does not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, Dist. of Columbia
Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983).
The relief sought by Smith is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of
mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?