Case Name: Jose Manuel ZALDIVAR-FUENTES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-09-26
Citations: 248 F. App'x 488
Docket Number: No. 07-6377
Parties: Jose Manuel ZALDIVAR-FUENTES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 248
Pages: 488–488

Head Matter:
Jose Manuel ZALDIVAR-FUENTES, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 07-6377.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 31, 2007.
Decided: Sept. 26, 2007.
Jose Manuel Zaldivar-Fuentes, Appellant Pro Se. Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Jose Manuel Zaldivar-Fuentes 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 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 his 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, 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Zaldivar-Fuentes 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.