07-7724 | 4th Cir. | May 27, 2008
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Guiseppe L. Wallace, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Lanier File, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES, Beckley, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Guiseppe Wallace, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order rejecting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322" date_filed="2003-02-25" court="SCOTUS" case_name="Miller-El v. Cockrell">537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473" date_filed="2000-04-26" court="SCOTUS" case_name="Slack v. McDaniel">529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676" date_filed="2001-05-24" court="4th Cir." case_name="Rose v. Lee">252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wallace has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Wallace’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
- 2 -