UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6098

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus

ROBERT MORRIS COCHRAN, Defendant - Appellant.

No. 00-6165

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus

ROBERT MORRIS COCHRAN, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-813-BO)

Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 31, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Morris Cochran, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Dickerson Kocher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Robert Morris Cochran appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to continue Coch- ran’s commitment under 18 U.S.C. § 4246(a) (1994) and the district court’s order denying Cochran’s motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cochran, No. CA-96-813-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Dec. 13, 1999 & Jan. 19, 2000*). We deny Cochran’s motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense. 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.

AFFIRMED

* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on January 18, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on January 19, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 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).