UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7137
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RODNEY D. EDMONSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-99-13, CA-01-139-5)
Submitted: November 6, 2003 Decided: November 18, 2003
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodney D. Edmonson, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. McWilliams, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Rodney D. Edmonson seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not
be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that
any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also
debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, ,
123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Edmonson has
not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 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