UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6814
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TRESSIE LYNN MITCHELL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Chief District
Judge. (CR-03-78; CA-04-449-7)
Submitted: August 18, 2005 Decided: August 26, 2005
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tressie Lynn Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Howard Lee,
COMMONWEALTH’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Tazewell, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Tressie Lynn Mitchell, a federal prisoner, seeks to
appeal the district court’s order denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit
justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Jones v. Braxton, 392 F.3d 683 (4th
Cir. 2004); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 her
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 Mitchell 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 -