United States v. McDaniel , 194 F. App'x 138 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7593
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIE DEMARCUS MCDANIEL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-02-388; CA-04-576-FWB)
Submitted: May 1, 2006 Decided: August 11, 2006
Before LUTTIG,* TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Willie Demarcus McDaniel, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
*
Judge Luttig was a member of the original panel but did not
participate in this decision. This opinion is filed by a quorum of
the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).
PER CURIAM:
Willie Demarcus McDaniel, a federal prisoner, seeks a
certificate of appealability to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation denying
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. 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 and that any dispositive
procedural rulings by the district court are likewise 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 McDaniel has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny McDaniel’s request for a certificate
of appealability and dismiss his 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 -