In Re: Maurice Parker v.

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1776

In re: MAURICE PARKER,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:16-hc-02078-BO)

Submitted: December 12, 2016 Decided: January 5, 2017

Before SHEDD and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Maurice Parker, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Maurice Parker petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an

order directing the district court judge to order the North

Carolina Attorney General to investigate Parker’s claim of

actual innocence. We conclude that Parker 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). Mandamus “has traditionally been used in the federal

courts only to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of

its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its

authority when it is its duty to do so.” Moussaoui, 333 F.3d at

516 (internal quotation marks omitted).

The relief sought by Parker is not available by way of

mandamus. 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 materials before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2