Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bryant Pierre BOONE, a/k/a Ice, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-03
Citations: 120 F. App'x 491
Docket Number: No. 04-7503
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Bryant Pierre BOONE, a/k/a Ice, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 120
Pages: 491–492

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Bryant Pierre BOONE, a/k/a Ice, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 04-7503.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 27, 2005.
Decided: Feb. 3, 2005.
Bryant Pierre Boone, Appellant pro se.
Leslie Booner McClendon, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Bryant P. Boone seeks to appeal the district court's order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it as successive. The order is not appealable 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 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 that Boone has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Boone's motions to file a pro se supplemental brief, 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