Case Name: In re Robert W. PETTY, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-07-23
Citations: 40 F. App'x 871
Docket Number: No. 02-4446
Parties: In re Robert W. PETTY, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 40
Pages: 871–872

Head Matter:
In re Robert W. PETTY, Petitioner.
No. 02-4446.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 18, 2002.
Decided July 23, 2002.
Robert W. Petty, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Robert W. Petty brought this petition for writ of mandamus requesting this court to order the district court to correct its erroneous re-characterization of his motion as one filed pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 33. Petty has filed motions in the district court requesting such action, but the district court has not yet addressed these motions.
Petty has failed to present such an extraordinary situation as to warrant the drastic remedy of mandamus relief. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Because mandamus relief is not a substitute for an appeal, In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979), Petty has an available remedy, namely to allow the district court to address his motions, and, following entry of a final order, noting an appeal. Accordingly, while we grant Petty's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.