Case Name: Darrin W. CALDWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-02
Citations: 164 F. App'x 422
Docket Number: No. 05-6901
Parties: Darrin W. CALDWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 164
Pages: 422–422

Head Matter:
Darrin W. CALDWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 05-6901.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 9, 2006.
Decided: Feb. 2, 2006.
Darrin W. Caldwell, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Darrin W. Caldwell seeks to appeal the district court's judgment denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of apT pealability 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 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 independently reviewed the record and conclude Caldwell 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