UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6975
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
SCOTT MATTINGLY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CR-97-241-A, CA-00-80-AM)
Submitted: October 4, 2001 Decided: October 11, 2001
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Scott Mattingly, Appellant Pro Se. Gavin Alexander Corn, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Scott Mattingly seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting in part and denying in part his motion filed under 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and
the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Ac-
cordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Mattingly’s
“Notice Motion,” and dismiss the appeal substantially on the
reasoning of the district court.* United States v. Mattingly, Nos.
CR-97-241-A; CA-00-80-AM (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 12, 2001; entered
Apr. 13, 2001). 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
*
We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139
(4th Cir. 2001), that the new rule announced in Apprendi v. New
Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to
cases on collateral review. Accordingly, Appellant’s Apprendi
claim is not cognizable.
2