UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7526
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
STEPHANIE MOHR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge.
(8:00-cr-00453-DKC; 8:03-cv-02893-DKC)
Submitted: October 16, 2009 Decided: October 27, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Barry Coburn, Jeffrey Carll Coffman, COBURN & COFFMAN, PLLC,
Washington, D.C.; Rachel Marblestone Kamins, BENNETT & BAIR,
LLC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Chan Park, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stephanie Mohr seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009)
motion and denying her motion to amend. The order is 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 Mohr 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