Court Opinion

ID: 8599962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 21:16:52.234743+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:09.623145
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
William Shorter, Jr., seeks to appeal from the district court’s order dismissing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion for which authorization had not been obtained. 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 *424substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is 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, 336-38, 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 Shorter 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