UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-5031
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
LEONARD W. CHEATHAM,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (CR-02-329; CA-04-397-3)
Submitted: April 8, 2005 Decided: April 27, 2005
Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leonard W. Cheatham, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller,
Roderick Charles Young, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Leonard W. Cheatham, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal
the district court orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000)
motion and his subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to
reconsider. 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 Cheatham has not made the requisite
showing as to either order. 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 -