Case Name: Samuel Lewis BAKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-28
Citations: 275 F. App'x 217
Docket Number: No. 07-6068
Parties: Samuel Lewis BAKER, Jr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 275
Pages: 217–218

Head Matter:
Samuel Lewis BAKER, Jr., Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 07-6068.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 11, 2007.
Decided: April 28, 2008.
Samuel Lewis Baker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge Mott, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Samuel Lewis Baker, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order 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 ap-pealability. 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 Baker 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.