Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Randall Lee CONRAD, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-30
Citations: 275 F. App'x 225
Docket Number: No. 08-6344
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Randall Lee CONRAD, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 275
Pages: 225–225

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Randall Lee CONRAD, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 08-6344.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 24, 2008.
Decided: April 30, 2008.
Randall Lee Conrad, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Randall Lee Conrad 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 appeal-able 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 Conrad 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.