Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armistead D. MYERS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-04-20
Citations: 126 F. App'x 135
Docket Number: No. 05-6005
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Armistead D. MYERS, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 126
Pages: 135–136

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Armistead D. MYERS, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-6005.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 14, 2005.
Decided: April 20, 2005.
Armistead D. Myers, Appellant pro se.
Stephen Matthew Schenning, Harvey Ellis Eisenberg, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Armistead D. Myers seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding 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 the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Myers 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