Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Khojandi Bernard LANDON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-16
Citations: 312 F. App'x 515
Docket Number: No. 08-6731
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Khojandi Bernard LANDON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 312
Pages: 515–515

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Khojandi Bernard LANDON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-6731.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 11, 2008.
Decided: Sept. 16, 2008.
Khojandi Bernard Landon, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Cornell Wallace, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Khojandi Bernard Landon seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The 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 ap-pealability 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 disposi-tive 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 Landon 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.