UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6464
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DERRICK RAMON THIGPEN, a/k/a Pookie,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (CR-00-162; CA-05-142-2)
Submitted: August 22, 2005 Decided: September 16, 2005
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derrick Ramon Thigpen, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Ramon Thigpen seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion
and denying his subsequent motion to reconsider pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b). The orders are 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 Thigpen has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny Thigpen’s motion for 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