-
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7200 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARIO OCHOA CASTRO, Defendant - Appellant. No. 04-7201 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARIO OCHOA CASTRO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-02-83; CR-02-48; CA-03-851-1) Submitted: January 27, 2005 Decided: February 2, 2005 Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mario Ochoa Castro, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Mario Ochoa Castro seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his motion filed under
28 U.S.C. § 2255(2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding 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 for claims addressed by a district court 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); Rose v. Lee,
252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Castro 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 - 3 -
Document Info
Docket Number: 04-7200, 04-7201
Citation Numbers: 120 F. App'x 487
Judges: Luttig, Duncan, Hamilton
Filed Date: 2/2/2005
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 10/18/2024