UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1453
In re: REGINALD U. FULLARD,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:19-cv-01085-LCB-JLW)
Submitted: August 31, 2021 Decided: January 5, 2022
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Reginald U. Fullard, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Reginald U. Fullard petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order reversing his
North Carolina criminal convictions or granting a new trial. We conclude that Fullard is
not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown,
LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when
the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to
attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal
quotation marks omitted).
This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state courts,
Gurley v. Superior Ct. of Mecklenburg Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969) (per
curiam), or to review final state court orders, D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S.
462, 482 (1983). Thus, the relief sought by Fullard is not available by way of mandamus.
We accordingly 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