UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6094

PETER LENOX ALLEN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

SEAWALL SMITH, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 98-2363-S)

Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 5, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Peter Lenox Allen, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Peter Lenox Allen seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). 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 rea- soning of the district court. See Allen v. Smith, No. CA-98-2363-S (D. Md. Jan. 4, 1999).* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on December 30, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on January 4, 1999. Pursuant to Rules and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision.

Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).