Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Christophe GRIFFIN, a/k/a Roger Small, a/k/a Flame, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-02-21
Citations: 266 F. App'x 268
Docket Number: No. 07-7350
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Christophe GRIFFIN, a/k/a Roger Small, a/k/a Flame, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 266
Pages: 268–269

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Christophe GRIFFIN, a/k/a Roger Small, a/k/a Flame, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 07-7350.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 30, 2008.
Decided: Feb. 21, 2008.
Dana Roger Cormier, Dana R. Cormier, PLC, Staunton, Virginia, for Appellant. Ruth Elizabeth Plagenhoef, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Christophe Griffin seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appeal-able 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dis-positive 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 Griffin 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.