Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monica GREGORY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-16
Citations: 174 F. App'x 139
Docket Number: No. 05-6082
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Monica GREGORY, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 174
Pages: 139–140

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Monica GREGORY, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-6082.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 28, 2006.
Decided March 16, 2006.
Monica Gregory, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Monica Gregory seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on her motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). 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 her constitutional claims are debatable 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, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gregory has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability 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.