UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6909
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY MARK WILSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (1:04-CR-00379-LDW-4; 1:08-cv-00285-LDW)
Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 21, 2008
Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Mark Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. G. David Hackney, Assistant
United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Mark Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, as well
as its order granting in part and denying in part Wilson’s Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration. The orders are not
appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate
of appealability. See 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. 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
Wilson 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