Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Glen Wayne STAPLETON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-03
Citations: 164 F. App'x 439
Docket Number: No. 05-7726
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Glen Wayne STAPLETON, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 164
Pages: 439–439

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Glen Wayne STAPLETON, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-7726.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 26, 2006.
Decided: Feb. 3, 2006.
Glen Wayne Stapleton, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Matthew Hurt, Office of the United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia; Steven Randall Ramseyer, Office of the United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Glen Wayne Stapleton seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as a successive motion for which prefiling authorization had not been obtained, and a subsequent order denying his motion for reconsideration. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000). The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); see Jones v. Braxton, 392 F.3d 683, 684 (4th Cir.2004). 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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is 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 Stapleton 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