United States v. Gonzalez-Vasquez

174 F. App'x 154

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6115

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JORGE GONZALEZ-VASQUEZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:01-cr-00507-JFA-1; 3:04-cv-23196-JFA)

Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 31, 2006

Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jorge Gonzalez-Vasquez, Appellant Pro Se. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, William Kenneth Witherspoon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Jorge Gonzalez-Vasquez seeks to appeal the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and

orders denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion and the motions for

a certificate of appealability and for judicial notice. The

judgment and orders are 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 Gonzalez-Vasquez 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 -