In Re: Lateef Fisher

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000108237-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000102528-2] Originating case number: 1:14-cr-00413-RDB-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000178491]. Mailed to: Lateef Fisher. [17-1746]

Appeal: 17-1746

Doc: 9

Filed: 10/23/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1746

In re: LATEEF FISHER
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
(No. 1:14-cr-00413-RDB-1)

Submitted: October 19, 2017

Decided: October 23, 2017

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lateef Fisher, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-1746

Doc: 9

Filed: 10/23/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Lateef Fisher filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the
district court to order the Federal Public Defender’s Office to turn over discovery to him
related to his 2015 drug convictions.

We conclude that Fisher 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). Further, 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).
Fisher filed a motion for release of discovery materials in the district court that the
court denied after Fisher filed this petition for writ of mandamus. To the extent that
Fisher sought an order alleging undue delay, the petition is moot. Further, mandamus
may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351,
353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by Fisher 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 decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2