UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7853
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
EARL EDWIN PITTS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, District
Judge. (1:96-cr-00483-TSE; 1:06-cv-00064-TSE)
Submitted: February 15, 2007 Decided: February 26, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Earl Edwin Pitts, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Marie Kahoe,
Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Earl Edwin Pitts seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and
denying his motion for reconsideration. 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims
by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any
dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise
debatable. 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 Pitts 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 -