UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6891
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JAMES ROCKETT, III, a/k/a James Rocket, a/k/a James Rockett,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr.,
District Judge. (2:05-cr-00135-WDK-JEB-1; 2:07-cv-00336-WDK)
Submitted: December 11, 2008 Decided: December 23, 2008
Before KING, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Rockett, III, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl James Mitchell,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Rockett, III, seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000)
motion. 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). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rockett has
not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Additionally, we deny Rockett’s motions for production of
transcripts and to expand the record. 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