Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge GONZALEZ-VASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-31
Citations: 174 F. App'x 156
Docket Number: No. 06-6115
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jorge GONZALEZ-VASQUEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 174
Pages: 156–157

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jorge GONZALEZ-VASQUEZ, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-6115.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 23, 2006.
Decided: March 31, 2006.
Jorge Gonzalez-Vasquez, Appellant Pro Se. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, William Kenneth Wither-spoon, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appel-lee.
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jorge Gonzalez-Vasquez seeks to appeal the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and orders denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion and the motions for a certificate of appealability and for judicial notice. The judgment and 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude Gonzalez-Vasquez 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