In re: Arthur Douglas, Iii

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7087
In Re: ARTHUR DOUGLAS, III,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-02-84)
Submitted: August 11, 2004 Decided: August 30, 2004
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur Douglas, III, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Douglas, III, petitions for a writ of mandamus,
seeking an order compelling discovery.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has
a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. &
Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus
is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S.
394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re
United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Douglas 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 the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --