Opinion
21-1408
07-01-2021
In re: KUNTA KENTA REDD, Petitioner.
Kunta Kenta Redd, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: June 29, 2021
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
Kunta Kenta Redd, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before HARRIS, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Kunta Kenta Redd petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order from this court directing an investigation into alleged irregularities in the processing of inmate mail at the Federal Correctional Institution Ashland. We conclude that Redd 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 (internal quotation marks and brackets 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 Redd is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for a 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