UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6275
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DORY MICHAEL EPPS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (CR-02-85; CA-04-652-2)
Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: January 30, 2006
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dory Michael Epps, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Calvin Moore,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Dory Michael Epps seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) and
denying his motion to reconsider filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
59(e) as a second or successive § 2255 motion. 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,
336-38 (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 Epps 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 -