United States v. Alston

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6023 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM ALSTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-94-269-A, CA-97-1691-AM) Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 16, 1999 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Alston, Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Joseph Leiser, Assis- tant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Alston seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), his motion for reconsideration, and his motion for a certificate of appealability. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. According- ly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Alston, Nos. CR-94-269-A; CA-97-1691-AM (E.D. Va. Aug. 19, Sept. 29, & Dec. 3, 1998).* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * Although the district court’s orders are marked as “filed” on Aug. 18, 1998, Sept. 28, 1998, and Dec. 2, 1998, the district court’s records show that they were entered on the docket sheet on Aug. 19, 1998, Sept. 29, 1998, and Dec. 3, 1998, respectively. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro- cedure, it is the date that the orders were physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decisions. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2