UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6409
In Re: AARON LAMONT BARNES,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-98-703-AM)
Submitted: May 10, 2000 Decided: June 5, 2000
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron Lamont Barnes, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Aaron Lamont Barnes filed a petition for a writ of mandamus
directing this court to restore his right to file a certificate of
appealability and to “give him appropriate disposition of his
‘Motion for 59(e) Relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro.’” with
respect to his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999) peti-
tion. The district court denied relief on Barnes’ § 2254 petition,
and this court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed
Barnes’ appeal. This court also denied Barnes’ petition for re-
hearing, and Barnes has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari.
In this mandamus petition, Barnes failed to establish that he
has a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav.
& Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus
relief may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re
United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). Because
Barnes essentially seeks another appeal of the district court’s
denial of his § 2254 petition and his Rule 59(e) motion, we grant
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny his petition for a writ
of mandamus and his amended petition. We dispense with oral argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre-
sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2