UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1678
In re: DAVID HILL,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:01-cr-00191-CMH-1)
Submitted: October 18, 2011 Decided: October 20, 2011
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Hill, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Hill petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an
order directing the district court to correct an alleged
clerical error in Hill’s criminal judgment. We conclude that
Hill is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. 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).
Hill asks this court to order the district court to
correct his criminal judgment. However, Hill has not
established a clear right to this relief. Moreover, to the
extent that Hill complains of the district court’s denial of his
motion to correct his judgment, we note that mandamus may not be
used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp.,
503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Thus, we conclude that there
is no basis for mandamus relief. 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
2
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3