United States v. Sadler
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6386
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WALTER LEE SADLER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-134-V, CA-99-3-V)
Submitted: May 11, 2000 Decided: May 18, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Walter Lee Sadler, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Walter Lee Sadler seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-
ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif-
icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of
the district court. See United States v. Sadler, Nos. CR-95-134-V;
CA-99-3-V (W.D.N.C. Feb. 16, 2000).* We dispense with oral argu-
ment 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 February 4, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on February 16, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date 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).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. Sadler (United States v. Sadler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.