United States v. Fairley , 157 F. App'x 602 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6705
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BILLY RAY FAIRLEY, SR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-02-229; CA-04-28-1)
Submitted: November 14, 2005 Decided: December 6, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Billy Ray Fairley, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Randall Stuart Galyon,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Billy Ray Fairley, Sr., seeks to appeal the district
court’s order affirming the magistrate judge’s denial of Fairley’s
motion to amend his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) petition. 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 (2003);
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 369
F.3d 363, 371 (4th Cir. 2004); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th
Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Fairley 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 -