UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6030
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL ALLEN KOKOSKI,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Elizabeth V. Hallanan,
Senior District Judge. (CR-92-90; CA-01-944-5)
Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 19, 2004
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Allen Kokoski, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Michael Allen Kokoski seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders accepting the report and recommendation of the
magistrate judge and denying relief on his motion filed under 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and denying relief on his motion to
reconsider filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). 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 Kokoski has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal. We also deny Kokoski’s motion to permit access
to the court and his motion for bail pending 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 -