
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clinton Mathew WALLACE, a/k/a Droop, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6850.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 18, 2002.
    Decided Dec. 4, 2002.
    Clinton Mathew Wallace, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, James Gerard Pyne, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Clinton Mathew Wallace 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 Wallace has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Wallace, Nos. CR-99-583; CA-02-174-AMD (D.Md. Jan. 22, 2002). Accordingly, we deny Wallace’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.  