Clair Loveridge, No. 09-1046 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1046 In Re: CLAIR LOVERIDGE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:03-cr-00063-IMK; 1:06-cv-00006-IMK) Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 24, 2009 Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clair Loveridge, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Clair Loveridge petitions for a writ of mandamus asking this court to review alleged sentencing errors by the district court. We conclude that Loveridge is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Cir. Ass n, mandamus 860 is a F.2d drastic 135, 138 remedy extraordinary circumstances. (4th and 1988). only should Further, used be in Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). appeal. Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). The relief sought by Loveridge is not available by way of mandamus. mandamus. legal before Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.