UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2103
In re: EDWARD PETER FLOYD, JR.,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(3:10-cr-00154-1)
Submitted: January 21, 2014 Decided: January 23, 2014
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward Peter Floyd, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edward Peter Floyd, Jr., petitions for a writ of
mandamus seeking an order granting relief on a prior motion
filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012). We conclude that
Floyd is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
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). 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 Floyd is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis and 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