Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Omar MILLIGAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-05
Citations: 228 F. App'x 372
Docket Number: No. 06-8016
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Omar MILLIGAN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 228
Pages: 372–372

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Omar MILLIGAN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-8016.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 31, 2007.
Decided: June 5, 2007.
Omar Milligan, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Omar Milligan seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as successive. The order is 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 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 Milligan 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.