Filed:   November 1, 1999

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 97-6880
                      (CR-94-49-R, CA-97-310-3)



United States of America,

                                                 Plaintiff - Appellee,

           versus


Edward L. Townes,

                                                Defendant - Appellant.



                              O R D E R



     The court amends its opinion filed September 2, 1998, as

follows:

     On the cover sheet, section 3, line 4 -- the district court’s

civil number is corrected to read “CA-97-310-3.”

                                          For the Court - By Direction



                                          /s/ Patricia S. Connor
                                                   Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 97-6880

EDWARD L. TOWNES,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, District Judge.
(CR-94-49-R, CA-97-310-3)

Submitted: August 13, 1998

Decided: September 2, 1998

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and
HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Edward L. Townes, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan Altimari,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Vir-
ginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief
on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
1998). Appellant's conviction became final on October 24, 1995. On
April 22, 1997, Appellant filed a § 2255 motion. The district court
denied relief on the grounds that Appellant filed his motion outside
the one-year limitation period imposed by § 2255. Pursuant to our
recent decision in Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, Nos. 96-7173,
96-7208, 

 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998), however, Appel-
lant had until April 23, 1997, in which to file a timely motion.
Accordingly, because Appellant filed his § 2255 motion by April 23,
1997, we grant a certificate of appealability, vacate the district court's
order, and remand this case for consideration on the merits. We dis-
pense 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

                     2