Bilal v. Angelone ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 00-6729
    JAWWAAD BILAL,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD ANGELONE,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
    trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior Dis-
    trict Judge. (CA-00-213-A)
    Submitted:   August 10, 2000             Decided:   September 26, 2000
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jawwaad Bilal, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Jawwaad Bilal seeks to appeal the district court’s order dis-
    missing as untimely his petition filed under 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2254
    (West 1994 & Supp. 2000) and a subsequent order denying relief on
    his post-judgment motions for reconsideration.   Bilal did not file
    a notice of appeal of the district court’s denial of the post-
    judgment motions, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii); see United States
    v. Holland, 
    214 F.3d 523
    , 525 n.4 (4th Cir. 2000).      Therefore,
    Bilal’s appeal is only timely as to the district court’s denial of
    his § 2254 petition.
    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
    district court.    See Bilal v. Angelone, No. CA-00-213-A (E.D. Va.
    Apr. 18, 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
    *
    Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
    April 18, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was
    entered on the docket sheet on April 19, 2000. Pursuant to Rules
    58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
    date the order 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-6729

Filed Date: 9/26/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021