Opinion
22-1798
09-29-2022
In re: DEANDRE JOHNSON, Petitioner.
Deandre Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: August 26, 2022
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (2:21-cv-00511-RAJ-LRL)
Deandre Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before DIAZ, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Deandre Johnson petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to vacate some of his state court convictions and bar his retrial on those counts. We conclude that Johnson 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 no other adequate means to attain the relief [he] desires" and demonstrates "a clear and indisputable right" to that relief. Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted).
Johnson has not demonstrated either "a clear and indisputable right" to the vacatur of his challenged state court convictions or that he lacks other adequate means of obtaining such relief. See id (internal quotation marks omitted). Insofar as Johnson alleges that the district court has unreasonably delayed in ruling on his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court.
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