Case ID: f-appx_15/html/0061-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charlie WARD, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stephen DEWALT, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 01-6390.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 21, 2001.
    Decided June 29, 2001.
    Charlie Ward, Sr., pro se.
    
      Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

Charlie Ward, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We note that, even if the district court had jurisdiction to review Ward’s Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), claim, the sentence would not be in error because his 188-month sentence did not exceed the applicable statutory maximum. See 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(C) (West 1999); United States v. Kinter, 235 F.3d 192, 199 (4th Cir.2000). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ward v. Dewalt, No. CA-00-856 (E.D.N.C. filed Jan. 22, 2001; entered Jan. 23, 2001). 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.