UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7147
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
KENNETH EUGENE BARRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District
Judge. (1:94-cr-00306-WMN; 1:07-cv-01604-WMN)
Submitted: September 11, 2007 Decided: September 17, 2007
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth Eugene Barron, Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, United
States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Eugene Barron seeks to appeal the district
court’s order treating his “Petition for a Writ of Error Coram
Nobis” as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and
dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a
circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369
(4th Cir. 2004). 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 that Barron 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 -