Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Jackson NOFFLETT, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-13
Citations: 104 F. App'x 332
Docket Number: No. 04-6392
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joseph Jackson NOFFLETT, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 104
Pages: 332–332

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joseph Jackson NOFFLETT, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-6392.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 21, 2004.
Decided Aug. 13, 2004.
Joseph Jackson Nofflett, Appellant pro se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Joseph Nofflett appeals from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion to vacate his sentence. An appeal may not be taken to this court 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 jurists of reason 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 reviewed the record and conclude that Nofflett has not made the requisite showing. We therefore 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