Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Marion HAMPTON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-06-11
Citations: 36 F. App'x 518
Docket Number: No. 02-6287
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Marion HAMPTON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 36
Pages: 518–518

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Marion HAMPTON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-6287.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 30, 2002.
Decided June 11, 2002.
Kenneth Marion Hampton, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Kenneth Marion Hampton seeks to appeal the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001) motion challenging his conviction and ten-year sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of disqualified possession of a firearm by a felon, see 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West 2000). For the following reasons, we dismiss Hampton's appeal.
We find no merit in any of Hampton's ineffective assistance of counsel claims. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). The district court was entitled to rely on conduct charged in a dismissed count of Hampton's indictment in enhancing Hamp-ton's offense level under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(5) (2000). See United States v. Williams, 880 F.2d 804, 805 (4th Cir.1989). Similarly, the court properly relied on Hampton's prior state convictions in the calculation of his criminal history. See Daniels v. United States, 532 U.S. 374, 382, 121 S.Ct. 1578, 149 L.Ed.2d 590 (2001). Therefore, Hamp-ton did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel in these respects. Finally, Hamp-ton's ineffective assistance claim predicated on United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 131 L.Ed.2d 626 (1995), is equally meritless. See United States v. Wells, 98 F.3d 808, 811 (4th Cir.1996) (citing cases).
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss Hampton's appeal. 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.