In re: Eric Creighton Sampson

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6212
In Re: ERIC CREIGHTON SAMPSON,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
(3:95-cr-00031-2)
Submitted: April 19, 2007 Decided: April 25, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric Creighton Sampson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Eric Creighton Sampson petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order clarifying the court’s opinion in his direct
appeal and remanding his case to the district court. See United
States v. Sampson, 140 F.3d 575 (4th Cir. 1998). We conclude that
Sampson is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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). Further, mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. 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. In re United
Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Sampson 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 --