United States v. Roberts , 202 F. App'x 610 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7181
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MARK ANTHONY ROBERTS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (2:96-cr-00068-PMD-1; 2:06-cv-00132-PMD)
Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 11, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark Anthony Roberts, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Rhett DeHart,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mark Anthony Roberts seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. 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 any
assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is
debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
the district court is likewise debatable. 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 Roberts 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 -