United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Godwin Nonyelum Chinagoram, Defendant-appellant, 905 F.2d 1532 (4th Cir. 1990)

Godwin Chinagoram appeals the denial of his motion to reconsider the district court's previous denial of his motion to correct sentence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a). Although Rule 35 no longer provides for correction of a sentence except after an appeal of the sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3742, Chinagoram may attack the legality of his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. His failure to name the correct statute does not prevent us from reaching his claim. United States v. Santora, 711 F.2d 41 (5th Cir. 1983).

Our review of the record and materials filed on appeal in this case discloses that Chinagoram has been released from custody of the Bureau of Prisons by expiration of his sentence. Because the issue on appeal concerns only the calculation and imposition of his sentence, this case is now moot. Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624 (1982). We therefore modify the district court's order to reflect dismissal on grounds of mootness and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

MODIFIED AND DISMISSED.