UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Barry L. COLEMAN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant, 460 F. App'x 274

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).