Court Opinion

ID: 8599399
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 20:42:40.813467+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:08.061165
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
Allan Edward Stewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Stewart cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a certificate of appealability, and a certificate of appealability will not issue absent a “substantial showing of *607the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A § 2255 movant meets 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, 326, 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 Stewart 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