Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond BLACKWELL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-22
Citations: 170 F. App'x 867
Docket Number: No. 04-7653
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Raymond BLACKWELL, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 170
Pages: 867–868

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Raymond BLACKWELL, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-7653.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 1, 2006.
Decided May 22, 2006.
Raymond Blackwell, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Andrea L. Smith, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Raymond Blackwell, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and denying reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless this court 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 Blackwell 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