ON REHEARING
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6234
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN SAMUEL LEIGH,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,
District Judge. (3:00-cr-00057-WCB; 3:04-cv-00022-WCB)
Submitted: July 9, 2007 Decided: September 13, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Henry Nave, CHARLES H. NAVE, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellant. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States
Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Samuel Leigh seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We
previously dismissed the appeal, but subsequently granted
rehearing. 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
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).
Although the district court erroneously concluded that
Leigh failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge’s
recommendation, we have independently reviewed the record and
conclude that Leigh has not made the requisite showing for issuance
of a certificate of appealability. 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.
- 2 -
DISMISSED
- 3 -