PER CURIAM.
Wendell Wood seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). 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. See United States v. Wood, Nos. CR-93-20; CA-00-718-2 (E.D.Va. July 31, 2001). 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 we have not determined when the limitations period accrues for claims raising issues under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), see United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139, 144 (4th Cir.2001), we have held, as the district court recognized, that Apprendi does not apply retroactively on collateral review. Id. at 151.