Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arnold MURDOCK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-01-24
Citations: 2 F. App'x 335
Docket Number: No. 00-7237
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arnold MURDOCK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 2
Pages: 335–336

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arnold MURDOCK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-7237.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 18, 2001.
Decided Jan. 24, 2001.
Arnold Murdock, pro se. Joyce Kallam McDonald, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.
Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Arnold Murdock appeals the district court's order denying him an extension of time in which to file a notice of appeal of his conviction and sentence. We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Murdock's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny his motion for a certificate of appeal-ability, and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Murdock, No. CR-92-301-S (D.Md. Aug. 10, 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.
Final judgment was entered in Murdock's case in 1993. Therefore, the district court construed Murdock's notice of appeal, filed July 31, 2000, as a motion for extension of time to file an appeal,