UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7448
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CLINTON STANLEY MATTHEWS, a/k/a Ian Bernard
Matthew, a/k/a Craig Jerrod Ingram, a/k/a
Bernard Jones, a/k/a William Christopher
Hinton, a/k/a Clinton Mallhew, a/k/a Stanley
Matthews, a/k/a Eastwood, a/k/a Wood,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-93-66-A, CA-01-460-2)
Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clinton Stanley Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Carol M. Marx, Special
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Clinton S. Matthews seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the
reasoning of the district court.* United States v. Matthews, Nos.
CR-93-66-A; CA-01-460-2 (E.D. Va. July 17, 2001). 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
*
Additionally, we find that the district court’s sua sponte
dismissal of Matthews’ motion does not implicate Hill v. Braxton,
277 F.3d 701, 707 (4th Cir. 2002), as Matthews failed to offer a
valid basis that would justify either reliance on a later starting
point in 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(d)(1) (West Supp. 2002), or equitable
tolling, thereby salvaging his otherwise untimely petition.
2