Filed: Apr. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2531 In re: KEVIN WAYNE MCDANIELS, Petitioner. On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 25, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin Wayne McDaniels, Petitoner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kevin Wayne McDaniels petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order d
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2531 In re: KEVIN WAYNE MCDANIELS, Petitioner. On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 25, 2016 Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin Wayne McDaniels, Petitoner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kevin Wayne McDaniels petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order di..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2531
In re: KEVIN WAYNE MCDANIELS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
Submitted: April 21, 2016 Decided: April 25, 2016
Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin Wayne McDaniels, Petitoner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kevin Wayne McDaniels petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the South Carolina state court to
dismiss criminal charges against him. We conclude that
McDaniels 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). Moreover, this court does not have jurisdiction to grant
mandamus relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior
Court of Mecklenburg Cnty.,
411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969),
and does not have jurisdiction to review final state court
orders, Dist. of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,
460 U.S.
462, 482 (1983).
The relief sought by McDaniels 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
also deny McDaniels’ motion for bail or release pending appeal
as well as his motion to amend exhibits. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3
