Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Leon BUCKNER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-01-17
Citations: 1 F. App'x 252
Docket Number: No. 00-7282
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Leon BUCKNER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 1
Pages: 252–253

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Leon BUCKNER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-7282.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 11, 2001.
Decided Jan. 17, 2001.
Robert Leon Buckner, pro se. Andrew George Warrens Norman, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Robert Leon Buckner 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 in the court's denial of Buckner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss this portion of the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Buckner, Nos. CR-97-413-JFM; CA-99-3578-JFM (D.Md. July 27, 2000).
With regard to Buckner's claim that he should receive credit for time served in state custody on charges unrelated to his federal offense, we find that the district court did not have jurisdiction to consider the claim because such claims, which challenge the execution of a sentence, must be filed in a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994), in the district court where Buckner is confined. United States v. Miller, 871 F.2d 488, 489-90 (4th Cir.1989). We therefore dismiss this portion of the appeal. We deny Buckner's motion to expedite the appeal as moot and 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.