Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Tremayne GRIFFIN, a/k/a Nugget, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-05
Citations: 55 F. App'x 214
Docket Number: No. 02-7675
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Tremayne GRIFFIN, a/k/a Nugget, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 214–214

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Scott Tremayne GRIFFIN, a/k/a Nugget, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-7675.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 30, 2003.
Decided Feb. 5, 2003.
Scott Tremayne Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Glen Reel, Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Scott Tremayne Griffin seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Griffin has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Griffin, Nos. CR-99-68-2; CA-02-75-2 (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 1, 2002 & entered Oct. 2, 2002). We note that Griffin claims on appeal that the district court failed to address his selective prosecution allegation. While the district court did not expressly address this claim, Griffin offered no support for his conclusory allegations. Therefore, no relief is warranted. Accordingly, we deny Griffin's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.