Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth BROWN, a/k/a Sugar Bear, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-05-22
Citations: 10 F. App'x 145
Docket Number: No. 00-7124
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth BROWN, a/k/a Sugar Bear, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 145–146

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth BROWN, a/k/a Sugar Bear, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-7124.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 17, 2001.
Decided May 22, 2001.
Robert Gregg Levitt, Denver, CO, for appellant. E. Jean Howard, Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, SC, for appellee.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Kenneth Brown 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 certifícate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Brown, Nos. CR-97-170; CA-99-3666-8-13 (D.S.C. June 8, 2000). 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.
Brown claims on appeal 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). 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. Accordingly, Brown's Apprendi claim is not cognizable.