In re: Barry Richardson

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-1627
In re: BARRY RICHARDSON,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:20-cv-00424-CCE-JLW)
Submitted: April 22, 2021 Decided: April 26, 2021
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Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
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

-- 2 of 2 --