In re: Lafawn Dewayne Bobbitt, a/k/a Mandingo, a/k/a Dingo

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1894
In re: LAFAWN DEWAYNE BOBBITT, a/k/a Mandingo, a/k/a Dingo,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:97-cr-00169-JAG-1)
Submitted: October 14, 2021 Decided: October 18, 2021
Before DIAZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
LaFawn Dewayne Bobbitt, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
LaFawn Dewayne Bobbitt petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order
requiring the district court to “correct its order” denying his motion for compassionate
release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). We conclude that Bobbitt 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). Notably, 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 Bobbitt seeks 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 --