Court Opinion

ID: 997482
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 16:57:25.044166+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:49.269337
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 98-7058

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

BOBBY O. FOSTER, JR.,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior
District Judge. (CR-93-47, CA-97-428-3-P)

Submitted:   December 17, 1998            Decided:   January 6, 1999

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby O. Foster, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Scott Broyles,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Bobby Foster, Jr., 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 cer-

tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Foster, Nos. CR-93-47;

CA-97-428-3-P (W.D.N.C. June 3, 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 judgment is marked as “filed”
on June 1, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on June 3, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we take the date
that the judgment was entered on the docket sheet as the effective
date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806
F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

                                 2