United States v. Sanchez

                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 07-6772



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


DANIEL SANCHEZ,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.     Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:03-CR-184-RGD-FBS; 2:07-cv-131)


Submitted:   October 26, 2007          Decided:     November 16, 2007


Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Daniel Sanchez, Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr, Assistant
United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

           Daniel Sanchez 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 Sanchez has not

made the requisite showing.       Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We grant Sanchez’s motion to

seal medical record exhibits and deny his motion to expand the

certificate of appealability.           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 -