UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7355
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES PRESTON FRYE, a/k/a Jamie Frye,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (CR-01-167; CA-03-302-3)
Submitted: February 12, 2004 Decided: February 20, 2004
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Preston Frye, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Ronald Hood, Assistant
United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Preston Frye, Jr., seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2000). The order is appealable only if 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 Frye 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 -