UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6649
In Re: ARTHUR BILLY COLEMAN,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(CR-04-3499-M)
Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 30, 2005
Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur Billy Coleman, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Billy Coleman petitions for writ of mandamus. He
seeks an order directing the district court to adjudicate his
pending motion for leave to appeal out of time.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has
a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. &
Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus
is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. 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 may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re
United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
Because there are no pending motions in Coleman’s
criminal or habeas corpus cases, the petition for writ of mandamus
is moot. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We deny
Coleman’s motions for stay and bail pending appeal, to expedite the
appeal, and to raise a jurisdictional defect and reverse his
conviction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -