Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin CAMPFIELD, a/k/a Kevin Macon, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-07-05
Citations: 13 F. App'x 151
Docket Number: No. 01-6627
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin CAMPFIELD, a/k/a Kevin Macon, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 13
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin CAMPFIELD, a/k/a Kevin Macon, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-6627.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 21, 2001.
Decided July 5, 2001.
Kevin Campfield, pro se. Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.
Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Kevin Campfield seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Campfield, Nos. CR-98-315; CA-01-622-CCB (D.Md. Mar. 27, 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.
DISMISSED.
Campfield's claim that his sentence is not proper in light of the rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is without merit. We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139 (4th Cir.2001), that the new rule announced in Apprendi is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.