US v. Wilson

Filing 920080603

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7498

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RODNEY WILSON, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (4:03-cr-70134-nkm-3; 7:07-cv-267-nkm-mfu)

Submitted:

May 29, 2008

Decided:

June 3, 2008

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Rodney Wilson seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. not appealable unless a circuit justice or The order is issues a A

judge

certificate of appealability.

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000).

certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." § 2253(c)(2) (2000). that A prisoner satisfies would this 28 U.S.C. standard that by any

demonstrating

reasonable

jurists

find

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 Wilson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability, deny Wilson's motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal. facts and legal before We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the

contentions the court

materials

would

decisional process.

DISMISSED

- 2 -