United States of America v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139 4th Cir. 2001 , that resentencing pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim.…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7228
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CLYDE MICHAEL LEE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CR-97-186-A, CA-00-978-AM)
Submitted: May 15, 2001 Decided: June 28, 2001
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clyde Michael Lee, Appellant Pro Se. William Neil Hammerstrom,
Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

* We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139
(4th Cir. 2001), that resentencing pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim. P.
35 motion does not toll § 2255’s limitations period. Accordingly,
Lee’s claim that he has timely filed fails.
2
PER CURIAM:
Clyde Michael Lee seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2000). 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 substantially on the
reasoning of the district court. * United States v. Lee, Nos. CR-
97-186-A; CA-00-978-AM (E.D. Va. Aug. 9, 2000). We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --