Filed: Feb. 19, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2055 In Re: STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:08-cv-00322-GCM) Submitted: January 21, 2009 Decided: February 19, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stuart Wayne Tompkins, a North Carolina prisoner,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2055 In Re: STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:08-cv-00322-GCM) Submitted: January 21, 2009 Decided: February 19, 2009 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stuart Wayne Tompkins, a North Carolina prisoner, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2055
In Re: STUART WAYNE TOMPKINS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:08-cv-00322-GCM)
Submitted: January 21, 2009 Decided: February 19, 2009
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stuart Wayne Tompkins, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stuart Wayne Tompkins, a North Carolina prisoner,
petitions for a writ of mandamus. Tompkins asserts that he has
had difficulty sending and receiving mail at Mountain View
Correctional Institution, and he seeks an order compelling a
federal investigation. We deny the petition.
A writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only
in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist.
Court,
426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Relief under this writ is
available only when there is no other means for obtaining
relief. In re Beard,
811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). The
party seeking relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he
has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires”
and that his right to such relief is “clear and indisputable.”
Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.,
449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980).
Tompkins has not made such a showing in this case.
Accordingly, we deny the petition. 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