Case ID: f-appx_63/html/0147-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "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. Keith E. BRYANT, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-7814.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 30, 2003.
    Decided May 19, 2003.
    
      Keith E. Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. James G. Warwick, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Keith Bryant seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and denying his motion for a new trial under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a motion under § 2255 unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude Bryant has not made the requisite showing. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny Bryant’s motion for appointment of counsel and an investigator, deny a certificate of appeala-bility, and dismiss the appeal. 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.