UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7783
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TERRENCE COLEMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (CR-01-506-JFA; CA-05-2133-JFA)
Submitted: April 26, 2006 Decided: June 2, 2006
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrence Coleman, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Terrence Coleman seeks to appeal the district court's
order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2000), and his motion to alter or amend judgement under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e). 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 ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. 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 Coleman 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 -