UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7174

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus

ISAAC J. PEAR, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-92-445, CA-98-1245-2-8)

Submitted: February 29, 2000 Decided: August 30, 2000

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Isaac J. Pear, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Howe Hendricks, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Isaac J. Pear seeks to appeal the district court’s order deny- ing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999).

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. Pear failed to show that he was entitled to relief as a result of his counsel’s performance.

See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686 (1984); Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). Even assuming there was error in the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, such error was harmless. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(h). Finally, the district court did not err in declining to force the Government to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion on Pear’s behalf. We dispense with oral argument and deny Pear’s motion for the appointment of counsel at the Government’s expense because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED