Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cornelius KOLLOCK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-06
Citations: 70 F. App'x 723
Docket Number: No. 03-6820
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cornelius KOLLOCK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 70
Pages: 723–724

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cornelius KOLLOCK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-6820.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 15, 2003.
Decided Aug. 6, 2003.
Cornelius Kollock, Appellant Pro Se. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Cornelius Kollock seeks to appeal the district court's order and judgment adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a proceeding under § 2255 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 for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Kollock has not satisfied that standard. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.