Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Percell A. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-12
Citations: 20 F. App'x 212
Docket Number: No. 01-7162
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Percell A. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 20
Pages: 212–212

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Percell A. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-7162.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 4, 2001.
Decided Oct. 12, 2001.
Percell A. Davis, pro se. Fernando Groene, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA, for appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Percell A. Davis seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001), and denying subsequent motions to amend his § 2255 motion and for reconsideration. 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. Davis, Nos. CR-98-47; CA-01-392-2 (E.D. Va. June 8, June 18, and June 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.
We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139 (4th Cir.2001), that the new rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review. Accordingly, Davis' Ap-prendi claim is not cognizable.