Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-05
Citations: 183 F. App'x 396
Docket Number: No. 05-6394
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 183
Pages: 396–397

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-6394.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 3, 2006.
Decided: June 5, 2006.
Jesus Ruiz, Appellant Pro Se. Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 86(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jesus Ruiz, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is 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 Ruiz 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