United States v. Nasiruddin , 67 F. App'x 822 ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6460
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MUJAHID NASIRUDDIN, a/k/a John Crooks,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CR-97-223, CA-00-179-AM)
Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 25, 2003
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mujahid Nasiruddin, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Andrew Spencer, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mujahid Nasiruddin seeks to appeal the district court’s order
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 absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). An inmate
satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists
would find both 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, 123 S.Ct. 1029,
1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.
Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941(2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Nasiruddin 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