Court Opinion

ID: 1018123
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 22:15:05.717503+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:59:18.927404
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 05-6864

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

MORETTA T. BROWN,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.    Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (CR-01-769; CA-04-2409-JFA)

Submitted:   October 31, 2005           Decided:     December 27, 2005

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Moretta T. Brown, Appellant Pro Se.         Eric William Ruschky,
Assistant United States Attorney, Kevin Frank McDonald, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

            Moretta T. Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on her motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000).    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

his constitutional claims are 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 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).         We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Brown 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

                                     - 2 -