Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark James RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-07-03
Citations: 14 F. App'x 177
Docket Number: No. 01-6522
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark James RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 14
Pages: 177–178

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark James RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-6522.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 21, 2001.
Decided July 3, 2001.
Mark James Ramirez, pro se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.
Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark James Ramirez appeals the district court's order dismissing his § 2255 motion as untimely. 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 Ramirez's appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Ramirez, Nos. CR-98- 184-H; CA-01-44-5-H (E.D.N.C. Mar. 6, 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, 146 (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. Accord ingly, Ramirez's Apprendi claim is not cognizable.