United States v. Garcia

175 F. App'x 608

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7639

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PEDRO RINCON GARCIA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-99-792; CA-05-379-4-CMC)

Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 7, 2006

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Pedro Rincon Garcia, Appellant Pro Se. William Earl Day, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Pedro Rincon Garcia 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 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 the district

court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is 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 Garcia 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 -