                              UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 99-7212



LENROY MARTIN,

                                             Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus


THOMAS R. CORCORAN; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR.,

                                            Respondents - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA-
99-198-PJM)


Submitted:   March 23, 2000                 Decided:   March 29, 2000


Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Lenroy Martin, Appellant Pro Se.   John Joseph Curran, Jr., Ann
Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Balti-
more, Maryland, for Appellees.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Lenroy Martin seeks to appeal the district court’s order de-

nying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & 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 on the rea-

soning of the district court.   See Martin v. Corcoran, No. CA-99-

198-PJM (D. Md. Aug. 11, 1999).*     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




     *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
August 10, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on August 11, 1999. Pursuant to Rules
58 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).


                                 2
