Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Steven Maurice LANE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-03
Citations: 86 F. App'x 587
Docket Number: No. 03-7336
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Steven Maurice LANE, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 86
Pages: 587–588

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Steven Maurice LANE, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 03-7336.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 19, 2003.
Decided Feb. 3, 2004.
Steven Maurice Lane, Appellant pro se. Cynthia Elaine Tompkins, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.
Steven Maurice Lane seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). 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 Lane 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