United States v. McKubbin , 69 F. App'x 653 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  • PER CURIAM.

    Jackie McKubbin seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his motion to compel specific performance, which the district court properly construed as a motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and denying his motion for reconsideration. These orders are not appeal-able 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, 128 S.Ct. 1029, 1040, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that McKubbin 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.

Document Info

Docket Number: No. 03-6807

Citation Numbers: 69 F. App'x 653

Judges: Hamilton, Michael, Motz

Filed Date: 7/31/2003

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/23/2022