Court Opinion

ID: 998607
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:13:33.007897+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:29.657964
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 98-7569

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

JOEL D. DAVIS,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.   Walter E. Black, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (CR-85-473-B, CA-97-1255-B)

Submitted:   April 29, 1999                    Decided:   May 5, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joel D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Slaymaker Sale, Assistant
United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Joel Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

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 on the reasoning of the dis-

trict court.   See United States v. Davis, Nos. CR-85-473-B; CA-97-

1255-B (D. Md. Sept. 4, 1998).*       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

     *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
September 3, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on September 4, 1998.      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