UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7841
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Petitioner - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL CURTIS,
Respondent - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph Robert Goodwin,
District Judge. (2:89-00054-1; 2:05-cv-00949)
Submitted: June 21, 2007 Decided: June 26, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Curtis, Appellant Pro Se. Charles T. Miller, United States
Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Curtis seeks to appeal the district court's order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying as
successive his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 2 8 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 the district
court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or
wrong 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 Curtis has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Curtis’ motion to
hold his case in abeyance as moot, and 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 -