Case ID: f-appx_235/html/0195-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Brenda Kay JEFFREYS, a/k/a William B. Kay, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-6766.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 31, 2007.
    Decided: Aug. 23, 2007.
    Brenda Kay Jeffreys, Appellant Pro Se. John Eric Evenson, II, Winnie Jordan Reaves, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER, KING, and ■ GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Brenda Kay Jeffreys seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, denying her motion to alter or amend the judgment, and denying her request for a certificate of appealability. These orders are 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, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jeffreys has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny the 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.