UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6750
In Re: SHAWN RANDALL NORBREY,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-00-1803-AM)
Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: June 11, 2001
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Shawn Randall Norbrey, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Shawn Randall Norbrey has filed a motion for a writ of prohi-
bition seeking to have this court reverse his robbery conviction.
Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,
402 (1976). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no
other means by which the relief sought could be granted, In re
Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and may not be used as a
substitute for appeal. In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973 F.2d 1133,
1135 (4th Cir. 1992). The party seeking mandamus relief carries
the heavy burden of showing that he has “no other adequate means to
attain the relief he desires” and that his entitlement to such
relief is “clear and indisputable.” Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon,
Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980).
Because Norbrey has filed an appeal from the district court’s
order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254
(West 1994 & Supp. 2000), and because the instant motion is tanta-
mount to a second or successive § 2254 petition, for which he must
obtain authorization from this court to file, see 28 U.S.C.A. §
2244 (West Supp. 2000), Norbrey has failed to show that he is en-
titled to such extraordinary relief. Accordingly, although we grant
Norbrey leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the motion. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
2
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3