Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnny Lee BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-01
Citations: 170 F. App'x 269
Docket Number: No. 05-7208
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Johnny Lee BROWN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 170
Pages: 269–269

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Johnny Lee BROWN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-7208.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 28, 2006.
Decided March 1, 2006.
Johnny Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, Office of the United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Johnny Lee Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition which the court construed under § 2255. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding 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 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 Brown 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