United States v. Stokes ( 2000 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7278
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DERRICK STOKES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR-
96-258-DKC, CA-99-2162-DKC)
Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 17, 2000
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derrick Stokes, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart A. Berman, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Stokes seeks to appeal the district court’s order de-
nying 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.* Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis-
trict court. See United States v. Stokes, Nos. CR-96-258-DKC; CA-
99-2162-DKC (D. Md. June 28, 2000). 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
*
Stokes alleges for the first time on appeal that his sen-
tence was illegal under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348(2000). Even if this claim were properly before the court, Stokes
was not sentenced above the statutory maximum for the offense of
conviction. As a result, the sentence does not implicate the
concerns raised in Apprendi. See United States v. Angle, F.3d
, 2000 WL 1515159 (4th Cir. Oct. 12, 2000), petition for
rehearing filed, Oct. 26, 2000 (No. 96-4662).
2