United States v. Falesbork

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6522 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MERRICK RALPH FALESBORK, a/k/a Merrick, a/k/a Merc, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-91-116, CA-97-397-2) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 25, 1999 Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cheryl Johns Sturm, for Appellant. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Merrick Ralph Falesbork seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). 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. See United States v. Falesbork, Nos. CR-91- 116; CA-97-397-2 (E.D. Va. Mar. 2, 1999). 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 * Contrary to Falesbork’s argument, analysis of his ex post facto claim under the 1987 version of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, rather than the 1988 version, does not change the district court’s reasoning, which we deem to be sound. 2