United States v. Von Bressensdorf

88 F. App'x 679

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: March 10, 2004
• Docket: 03-7730, 03-7731
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Otto and Elena von Bressensdorf seek to appeal the district court’s order denying their 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motions. The von Bressensdorfs cannot appeal unless a circuit judge or justice issues a certificate of appealability, and 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 § 2255 movant meets 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, 326, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 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.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude the von Bressensdorfs have not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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