Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johney FREEMAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-09-17
Citations: 293 F. App'x 209
Docket Number: No. 08-7121
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Johney FREEMAN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 293
Pages: 209–210

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Johney FREEMAN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 08-7121.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 11, 2008.
Decided: Sept. 17, 2008.
Johney Freeman, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Joseph Seidel, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Johney Freeman seeks to appeal the district court's order treating his "Writ of Coram Nobis" as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. 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, 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 Freeman 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.