Opinion
23-1973
11-27-2023
In re: ARTHUR F. JONES, a/k/a Arthur Palmer, a/k/a June, a/k/a Junior, Petitioner.
Arthur F. Jones, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: November 21, 2023
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. (2:99-cr-00362-DCN-1)
Arthur F. Jones, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Arthur F. Jones petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district judge to vacate Jones' criminal conviction for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. We conclude that Jones 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).
The relief sought by Jones is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We deny Jones' motion to expedite as moot. 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