UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6906
In Re: ROY STEVE DAVIS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-89-407-A)
Submitted: September 8, 2000 Decided: September 18, 2000
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roy Steve Davis, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Roy Steve Davis has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus.
He seeks to have this court direct the district court to consider
issues raised in a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000) motion
filed in 1997. The § 2255 motion was denied and this court denied
a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. Mandamus
relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to
the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860
F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic
remedy and should only be used in extraordinary situations. See
Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re
Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus relief is only
available when there are no other means by which the relief sought
could be granted. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d at 826.
Because the § 2255 motion has been denied in the district
court and on appeal, Davis has not shown a clear right to the re-
lief sought. Although we grant Davis’ motion to proceed in forma
pauperis, we deny his petition for mandamus relief. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade-
quately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2