Gordon v. Deep Meadow Corr

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6268 SAMUEL T. GORDON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DEEP MEADOW CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-98-1865-AM) Submitted: July 27, 2000 Decided: August 2, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel T. Gordon, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Samuel T. Gordon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). 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 rea- soning of the district court. See Gordon v. Deep Meadow Correc- tional Ctr., No. CA-98-1865-AM (E.D. Va. Feb. 9, 2000).* 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 February 7, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on February 9, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we take the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet as the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2