U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2014

In re: Gary Hancock, Jr. v.

In re: Gary Hancock, Jr. v.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided September 25, 2014 · Niemeyer, Gregory, Hamilton
583 F. App'x 220

In re: Gary Hancock, Jr. v.

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gary Buterra Williams petitions for writ of mandamus seeking review of the magistrate judge’s order denying Williams’ motion for recusal. We conclude that Williams is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary cir- *221 eumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (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). 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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.