UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7231
ANDREW DAVID OWENS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL; STATE OF
NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Sr., Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-97-1101-1)
Submitted: January 21, 1999 Decided: February 9, 1999
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andrew David Owens, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Andrew David Owens seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West
1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
judge 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 Owens v. North Carolina Attorney Gen., No.
CA-97-1101-1 (M.D.N.C. July 28, 1998).* 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 judgment is marked as “filed”
on July 27, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on July 28, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date
that the judgment 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