United States v. Vass

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6997 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RONALD LEE VASS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CR-94-116, CA-96-905-2) Submitted: September 21, 2000 Decided: October 6, 2000 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Lee Vass, Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr, Fernando Groene, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ronald Lee Vass appeals the district court’s order denying his motions to nullify his prior 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000) motions, to amend his presentence report, and to hold an evi- dentiary hearing. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we af- firm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Vass, Nos. CR-94-116; CA-96-905-2 (E.D. Va. June 15, 2000).* The motions to compel the Government to disclose information and for an in camera viewing of the grand jury transcript are denied. 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. AFFIRMED * Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on June 14, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on June 15, 2000. 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