Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Ian Andre PERSAUD, a/k/a Baby Face Persaud, a/k/a Mark Persaud, Defendant - Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-01-30
Citations: 215 F. App'x 243
Docket Number: No. 06-7519
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Ian Andre PERSAUD, a/k/a Baby Face Persaud, a/k/a Mark Persaud, Defendant — Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 215
Pages: 243–244

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Ian Andre PERSAUD, a/k/a Baby Face Persaud, a/k/a Mark Persaud, Defendant — Appellant.
No. 06-7519.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 25, 2007.
Decided: Jan. 30, 2007.
Ian Andre Persaud, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Ian Andre Persaud seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and his motion to amend his § 2255 motion. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate 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 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 Persaud 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.