Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donte Lamont BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-09-03
Citations: 332 F. App'x 38
Docket Number: No. 09-6676
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donte Lamont BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 332
Pages: 38–39

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Donte Lamont BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-6676.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 26, 2009.
Decided: Sept. 3, 2009.
Donte Lamont Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Allen F. Loueks, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appel-lee.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donte Lamont Brown seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion and denying his motion for reconsideration. The orders are not ap-pealable 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 dis-positive 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 Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certifícate 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.