UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8159
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHAUNCEY FLOYD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.
(7:04-cr-01125-HFF-1; 7:06-cv-01084-HFF)
Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 23, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chauncey Floyd, Appellant Pro Se. Regan Alexandra Pendleton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chauncey Floyd seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008)
motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Floyd
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