UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7709
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BRUCE WAYNE TART,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
Judge. (CR-00-106; CA-02-2-1)
Submitted: March 25, 2004 Decided: March 30, 2004
Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bruce Wayne Tart, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Hale Levin, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Bruce Wayne Tart seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting a magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. This 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 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 Tart has not made the
requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Tart’s motion for a
certificate of appealability, deny his motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis, 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 -