UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7688
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
STANLEY O’NEAL GILL,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:04-cr-00020-F-1; 5:07-cv-00044-F)
Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 22, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanley O’Neal Gill, Appellant Pro Se. Winnie Jordan Reaves,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stanley O’Neal Gill seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
(West Supp. 2008) motion and denying his motion to alter or
amend under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The orders are not
appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 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. 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 Gill has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny Gill’s motion for 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