USCA4 Appeal: 24-1213 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/04/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1213

In re: JOHN ROBERT WILLIAMS, III, Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. (8:22-cr-00453-TDC-1)

Submitted: May 30, 2024 Decided: June 4, 2024

Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Robert Williams, III, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1213 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/04/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: John Robert Williams, III, petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order declaring that the district court violated his due process rights by unlawfully prosecuting him without subject matter jurisdiction. We conclude that Williams is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). 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 Williams is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, 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