Raymond Bradley Nottingham, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying 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 Nottingham has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Nottingham, Nos. CR-83-175-N; CA-01-512 (E.D.Va. Oct. 4, 2001). Accordingly, we deny 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.