United States v. Phillips

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7488 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CARLTON MILTON PHILLIPS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, Dis- trict Judge. (CR-93-17, CA-99-63-5-1-V) Submitted: March 22, 2001 Decided: March 28, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carlton Milton Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OF- FICE 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Carlton Milton Phillips seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). 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. United States v. Phillips, Nos. CR-93-17; CA- 99-63-5-1-V (W.D.N.C. filed Sept. 28, 2000; entered Oct. 5, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * Phillips alleges for the first time on appeal that his sentence was illegal under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). Even if this claim were properly before the court, Phillips was not sentenced above the statutory maximum under 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(C) (West 1999). As a result, the sentence does not implicate the concerns raised in Apprendi. See United States v. White, 238 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2001). 2