Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Troy James POWELL, a/k/a Sld Dft 5:01CR5-7, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-11-27
Citations: 255 F. App'x 724
Docket Number: No. 07-7172
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Troy James POWELL, a/k/a Sld Dft 5:01CR5-7, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 255
Pages: 724–725

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Troy James POWELL, a/k/a Sld Dft 5:01CR5-7, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-7172.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 15, 2007.
Decided: Nov. 27, 2007.
Troy James Powell, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding' precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Troy James Powell seeks to appeal the district court's order treating his motion to amend as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and dismissing it on that basis. 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 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 Powell 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.