UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7341
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
LAMONT PETTUS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Joseph Robert Goodwin,
District Judge. (CR-99-227; CA-02-1245-3)
Submitted: January 29, 2004 Decided: February 5, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lamont Pettus, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Lamont Pettus seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief
on 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, 336
(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 Pettus has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny his 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 -