United States v. Lattimore , 139 F. App'x 597 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7921
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BRIAN KEITH LATTIMORE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CR-02-157; CA-04-485-3-1-MU)
Submitted: June 17, 2005 Decided: July 28, 2005
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian Keith Lattimore, Appellant Pro Se. Robert John Gleason,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Brian Keith Lattimore seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2000). 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); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,
683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and
conclude that Lattimore has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny Lattimore’s motion for 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 -