Court Opinion

ID: 8599934
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 21:14:50.618928+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:09.540988
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
George Allen Ward, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his motion to modify the term of his imprisonment as a successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. Ward also appeals the court’s order denying his motion filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) *758(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 the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong 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 Ward 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