Case Name: Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michelle MITCHELL, Sheriff, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-03
Citations: 177 F. App'x 376
Docket Number: No. 05-7191
Parties: Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Michelle MITCHELL, Sheriff, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 376–376

Head Matter:
Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Michelle MITCHELL, Sheriff, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 05-7191.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 27, 2006.
Decided May 3, 2006.
Gary Buterra Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Gary Buterra Williams seeks to appeal the district court's order denying without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, in which he challenged his pretrial detention. This 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 his constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing because his challenge to his pretrial detention is moot. 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
We take judicial notice of Williams' December 2005 conviction upon his entry of a plea of guilty.