Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Anthony MOORE, a/k/a Tim Allison, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-06-06
Citations: 9 F. App'x 275
Docket Number: No. 00-7366
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Anthony MOORE, a/k/a Tim Allison, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 9
Pages: 275–276

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy Anthony MOORE, a/k/a Tim Allison, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-7366.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 31, 2001.
Decided June 6, 2001.
Timothy Anthony Moore, pro se.
Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, NC, for appellee.
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Timothy A. Moore appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition for writ of mandamus. A writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be granted only in those extraordinary situations when no other remedy is available. In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979). Here, Moore could have appealed the district court's order resentencing him based on his assistance to the Government in criminal prosecutions. Because there was an alternate method for seeking the requested relief, and because Moore presents no extraordinary circumstances, the district court properly denied the petition. Accordingly, we affirm. See United States v. Moore, No. CR-93-217 (W.D.N.C. Sept, 6, 2000). 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.
AFFIRMED.