Court Opinion

ID: 999878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:32:19.542867+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:13.642566
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 99-6968

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR., a/k/a Junior, a/k/a June,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CR-90-105)

Submitted:   September 30, 1999           Decided:   October 8, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cleveland McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, As-
sistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Cleveland McLean, Jr., appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 1999).   We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion and find no reversible error.   Accordingly, we deny a cer-

tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court.   See United States v. McLean, No. CR-90-105

(E.D. Va. May 13, 1999).*   We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-

terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

                                                         DISMISSED

     *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
May 11, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered
on the docket sheet on May 13, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and
79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that
the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

                                 2