UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7324
In Re: NATHANIEL BRANDT ROBINSON,
Petitioner.
On Petition For Writ of Mandamus. (CA-04-462)
Submitted: December 12, 2005 Decided: December 30, 2005
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathaniel Brandt Robinson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel Brandt Robinson petitions for writ of mandamus.
He seeks an order compelling the Clerk of the United States Supreme
Court to accept his petition for writ of certiorari as timely
filed.
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). “Mandamus ‘has
traditionally been used in the federal courts only to confine an
inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction
or to compel it to exercise its authority when it is its duty to do
so.’” United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516 (4th Cir.
2003) (quoting Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90, 95 (1967)).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United
Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). Further, mandamus
is a drastic remedy and should be used only 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).
The relief sought by Robinson 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 the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -