UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-2155
In re: SCOTT E. LUELLEN,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Prohibition.
(1:08-cr-00102-LO-1)
Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Scott E. Luellen, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Scott E. Luellen petitions for a writ of prohibition
seeking to divest the district court of jurisdiction to
adjudicate his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. We
conclude that Luellen is not entitled to relief.
Writs of mandamus and prohibition are drastic remedies
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). A “writ of
prohibition is a drastic and extraordinary remedy which should
be granted only when the petitioner has shown his right to the
writ to be clear and undisputable and that the actions of the
court were a clear abuse of discretion.” In re Vargas, 723 F.2d
1461, 1468 (10th Cir. 1983) (citation omitted). A writ of
prohibition may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Id.
(prohibition).
The relief sought by Luellen is not available by way
of prohibition. Accordingly, we deny Luellen’s writ. 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