UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6551
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES LAMONT JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
Judge. (CR-98-137-WLO; CA-04-541-1-1)
Submitted: September 27, 2005 Decided: September 30, 2005
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Lamont Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Alexander Weinman,
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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
James Lamont Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge,
construing Johnson’s motion as one under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000),
and dismissing it as successive. The 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,
336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.
Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently
reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson 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 -