UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sean Lamont DUDLEY, a/k/a John D. Brown, Defendant-Appellant, 46 F. App'x 188

PER CURIAM. Sean Lamont Dudley seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). 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 substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Dudley, Nos. CR-97-1-V; CA-99-152-V (W.D.N.C. Mar. 28, 2002). 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.

Dudley's claim of sentencing error based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is barred because it is raised initially on this appeal, see Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993), and because Apprendi is not retroactively applicable on collateral review. See United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139, 151 (4th Cir.2001). Moreover, Dudley may not challenge the validity of his state conviction in a § 2255 proceeding. See Daniels v. United States, 532 U.S. 374, 376, 382, 121 S.Ct. 1578, 149 L.Ed.2d 590 (2001).