United States of America v. Alfred Bell, a/k/a Prince Bell

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6405
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ALFRED BELL, a/k/a Prince Bell,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
District Judge. (CR-96-24, CA-00-172-1, CA-00-162-1)
Submitted: July 26, 2002 Decided: August 7, 2002
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alfred Bell, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Alfred Bell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying
his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion following the
denial of his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion
and agree with the court that Bell’s arguments under Apprendi v.
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), are foreclosed by United v.
Sanders, 247 F.3d 139, 147 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 573
(2001). Bell further contends that the district court erred in
construing his 60(b) motion as a successive petition. We need not
address this contention, however, as the district court’s reasoning
was alternative to its application of Sanders, which independently
forecloses this appeal. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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

-- 2 of 2 --