UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8121
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MAURICE GREGORY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (2:92-cr-00163-2; 2:08-cv-00393-REP)
Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 27, 2009
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maurice Gregory, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Maurice Gregory seeks to appeal the district court’s
order treating his self-styled Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion as a
successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008)
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) (2006);
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) (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 Gregory 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
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED
3