Case ID: f-appx_51/html/0460-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brian LINTON, a/k/a Bee, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6947.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 21, 2002.
    Decided Dec. 3, 2002.
    Brian Linton, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Brian Linton, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on the merits on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude that because Linton failed to timely file his § 2255 motion, see 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) (2000), he is not entitled to relief under § 2255. Moreover, we find that Linton is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. See generally Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal. Because the appeal presents no complex or substantial issues, we deny Linton’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.