Opinion
No. 20-1627
04-26-2021
In re: BARRY RICHARDSON, Petitioner.
Barry Richardson, Petitioner Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:20-cv-00424-CCE-JLW) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Barry Richardson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Barry Richardson, a North Carolina inmate, petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing two North Carolina Superior Court judges to grant his motions for appropriate relief and to amend discovery. We conclude that Richardson 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. Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795. This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Ct. of Mecklenburg Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and does not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983).
The relief sought by Richardson is not available by way of mandamus. 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