United States v. Barry Coleman, Jr. , 460 F. App'x 274 ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7087
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
BARRY L. COLEMAN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:05-cr-00367-JRS-1; 3:08-cv-00064-JRS)
Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012
Before AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Barry L. Coleman, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela
Mastandrea-Miller, Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Barry L. Coleman, Jr. appeals from the district
court’s orders denying his motions to file a notice of appeal
out of time and for reconsideration in his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255(West 2006 & Supp. 2011) proceeding. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. * United States v.
Coleman, Nos. 3:05-cr-00367-JRS-1; 3:08-cv-00064-JRS (E.D. Va.
June 13 & July 20, 2011). 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.
AFFIRMED
*
In addition, Coleman claims he received ineffective
assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to file a timely
notice of appeal. However, there is no constitutional right to
counsel in a collateral attack. See Hunt v. Nuth, 57 F.3d 1327,
1340 (4th Cir. 1995). Thus, even if counsel in his § 2255
proceeding was ineffective, that performance cannot give rise to
a cognizable claim for relief. United States v. MacDonald, 966
F.2d 854, 859 n.9 (4th Cir. 1992).
2