Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Christopher Leon MOORE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-27
Citations: 219 F. App'x 324
Docket Number: No. 06-7518
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Christopher Leon MOORE, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 219
Pages: 324–325

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Christopher Leon MOORE, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-7518.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 5, 2007.
Decided: Feb. 27, 2007.
Christopher Leon Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel David Marsh, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Christopher Leon Moore seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 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 Moore 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.