IN RE: Franklin C. SMITH (2018)

Franklin C. Smith petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing the state prison in which he is confined to provide free postage for his legal mail and directing state officials to provide full credit against his sentence for the time spent in pretrial detention. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought, and the respondent has a clear duty to perform the requested act. Cumberland Cty. Hosp. Sys., Inc. v. Burwell, 816 F.3d 48, 52 (4th Cir. 2016). This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg Cty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969).

Thus, the relief sought by Smith is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny Smith’s mandamus petition and supplemental petitions, and deny his motion to compel. 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

PER CURIAM:

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.