UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6581
In Re: TIMOTHY ADAMS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(CA-97-1225)
Submitted: June 9, 2005 Decided: June 17, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Adams, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Adams petitions for writ of mandamus. He
requests that this court direct the district court to rule on
whether an affidavit submitted by his trial counsel in Adams’ 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion constitutes a fraud upon the court due
to an alleged concealed conflict of interest.
Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in
extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court,
426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976). Courts are extremely reluctant to grant
a writ of mandamus. In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir.
1987). Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has
a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought and there are
no other adequate means for obtaining the relief. Allied Chem.
Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980); Beard, 811 F.2d at
826. Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In
re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Adams is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant 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
- 2 -