Filed: Jun. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1366 In re: PHIL JEMAR GRAHAM, a/k/a Touche, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:05-cr-01210-TLW-1) Submitted: June 19, 2014 Decided: June 23, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Phil Jemar Graham, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Phil Jemar Graham petitions for a writ of mandamu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1366 In re: PHIL JEMAR GRAHAM, a/k/a Touche, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:05-cr-01210-TLW-1) Submitted: June 19, 2014 Decided: June 23, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Phil Jemar Graham, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Phil Jemar Graham petitions for a writ of mandamus..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1366
In re: PHIL JEMAR GRAHAM, a/k/a Touche,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(4:05-cr-01210-TLW-1)
Submitted: June 19, 2014 Decided: June 23, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Phil Jemar Graham, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Phil Jemar Graham petitions for a writ of mandamus
challenging his career offender sentence and seeking relief from
this Court. We conclude that Graham 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).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal,
In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007),
and the relief sought by Graham 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
