Filed: Jan. 22, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2419 In re: JANISON VEAL, a/k/a Jason, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 3:02-cr-00043-JPB-JES-1) Submitted: January 17, 2013 Decided: January 22, 2013 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Janison Veal, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Janison Veal petitions for a writ of mandamus
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2419 In re: JANISON VEAL, a/k/a Jason, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 3:02-cr-00043-JPB-JES-1) Submitted: January 17, 2013 Decided: January 22, 2013 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Janison Veal, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Janison Veal petitions for a writ of mandamus s..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2419
In re: JANISON VEAL, a/k/a Jason,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(No. 3:02-cr-00043-JPB-JES-1)
Submitted: January 17, 2013 Decided: January 22, 2013
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Janison Veal, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Janison Veal petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking
an order compelling the district court to append its findings of
fact from Veal’s first resentencing to the presentence report
provided to the Bureau of Prisons. We conclude that Veal 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).
The relief sought by Veal 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