UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2379
In re: JAMES F. BADGETT,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:18-ct-03279-D)
Submitted: April 4, 2019 Decided: April 8, 2019
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James F. Badgett, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James F. Badgett, a criminal defendant presently subject to pretrial commitment,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4241(d), 4246(a) (2012), petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the district court to terminate his commitment and order his
release. “[M]andamus is a drastic remedy that should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances and may not be used as a substitute for appeal.” In re Lockheed Martin
Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). We grant mandamus relief only when the
petitioner has no other adequate means to attain the desired relief, the petitioner shows a
clear and indisputable right to that relief, and we deem the writ appropriate under the
circumstances. In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Because
there is no evidence of undue delay by the district court in any of Badgett’s pending
cases, and he has not demonstrated a clear right to mandamus relief, we deny the petition.
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