UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6676
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RANDY RICHARD BROOKS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-01-37; CA-02-834-1)
Submitted: June 24, 2004 Decided: July 2, 2004
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Randy Richard Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Randy Richard Brooks seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Brooks cannot
appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a
certificate of appealability, and 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 habeas
appellant meets 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 Brooks 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 -