                               UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                               No. 99-7111



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


JOSEPH FRANCIS SHEA, a/k/a Diamond Joe,

                                               Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CR-93-55, CA-96-1198-2)


Submitted:   October 8, 1999              Decided:   November 10, 1999


Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Joseph Francis Shea, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Michael Comstock,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Joseph Francis Shea seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999).   We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order

and find no reversible error.   Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the

district court.   See United States v. Shea, Nos. CR-93-55; CA-96-

1198-2 (E.D. Va. July 29, 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
July 28, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on July 29, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date
that 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
