In re: Xavier Milton Earquhart, a/k/a Xavier Smart, a/k/a Xavier Akpan Smart, a/k/a Xzavier…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1824
In re: XAVIER MILTON EARQUHART, a/k/a Xavier Smart, a/k/a Xavier Akpan
Smart, a/k/a Xzavier Erquhart, a/k/a Xzayvier Ernhart, a/k/a David Imrich, a/k/a
Kevin Liols, a/k/a Michael Powell, a/k/a Melvin Hailstones, a/k/a Rety Humos,
a/k/a Milton Monn,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:17-cr-00134-BR-1)
Submitted: September 14, 2021 Decided: September 17, 2021
Before THACKER and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Xavier Milton Earquhart, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Xavier Milton Earquhart petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing
the district court to dismiss the superseding indictment, vacate his convictions, and return
seized property to him. We conclude that Earquhart 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). Finally, 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 Earquhart 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

-- 2 of 2 --