In Re: Charles Adams v.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
In Re: Charles Adams v., 670 F. App'x 774 (4th Cir. 2016)
Gregory, Motz, Per Curiam, Traxler

In Re: Charles Adams v.

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Charles Jerome Adams petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to resentence him. We conclude that Adams 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, 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).

The relief sought by Adams is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal bonten-tions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

Reference

Full Case Name
In RE: Charles Jerome ADAMS, Petitioner
Status
Unpublished