Filed: Jul. 21, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1084 In Re: STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:03-cv-00299-TDS-WWD) Submitted: July 14, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010 Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stanley Lorenzo Williams petitions for a writ of
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1084 In Re: STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:03-cv-00299-TDS-WWD) Submitted: July 14, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010 Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Stanley Lorenzo Williams petitions for a writ of m..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1084
In Re: STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:03-cv-00299-TDS-WWD)
Submitted: July 14, 2010 Decided: July 21, 2010
Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stanley Lorenzo Williams petitions for a writ of
mandamus challenging the criminal judgments in two state cases
and seeking immediate release from prison or vacatur of the
judgments. We conclude that Williams is not entitled to
mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
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). Additionally,
mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal, In re
Lockheed Martin Corp.,
503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007), and is
not available if the petitioner has other adequate means to seek
the desired relief. In re Braxton,
258 F.3d 250, 261 (4th Cir.
2001).
The relief sought by Williams is not available by way
of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of
mandamus. We deny as moot Williams’ motions to expedite and
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3
