Case Name: Samuel WESLEY-EL, a/k/a Rick, a/k/a Samuel Wesley, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.D. WHITEHEAD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-23
Citations: 308 F. App'x 690
Docket Number: No. 08-8047
Parties: Samuel WESLEY-EL, a/k/a Rick, a/k/a Samuel Wesley, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.D. WHITEHEAD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 308
Pages: 690–691

Head Matter:
Samuel WESLEY-EL, a/k/a Rick, a/k/a Samuel Wesley, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.D. WHITEHEAD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 08-8047.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 15, 2009.
Decided: Jan. 23, 2009.
Samuel Wesley-El, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Samuel Wesley-El seeks to appeal the district court's order construing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006), as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2006) motion and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction, and the court's order denying reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 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, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wesley-El 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 be fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.