UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4648
In Re: DAVID SHUMAN, a/k/a/ Jake,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-03-27)
Submitted: December 22, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David L. Shuman, Petitioner Pro se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
David Shuman petitions this court for a writ of mandamus
directing the district court to dismiss all criminal counts against
him if the district court agrees with the grounds Shuman raised in
various post-conviction motions. For the reasons that follow, we
dismiss the petition.
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). Further, mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,
402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
Mandamus is available only if there are no other means by which the
relief sought could be granted. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon,
Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980). Mandamus may not be used as a
substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958,
960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought here is not available by way of
mandamus. Shuman attempts to use mandamus as a substitute for
appeal, which he cannot do. Nor can he demonstrate that mandamus
is the only adequate remedy available to him. Accordingly, we deny
the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the
petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
- 2 -
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DISMISSED
- 3 -