United States of America v. Joseph Jackson Nofflett

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6392
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOSEPH JACKSON NOFFLETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.
(CR-00-372; CA-03-372-nkm)
Submitted: July 21, 2004 Decided: August 13, 2004
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Jackson Nofflett, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Nofflett appeals from the dismissal of his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion to vacate his sentence. An appeal may
not be taken to this court 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 jurists of
reason 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 reviewed the record and conclude that Nofflett
has not made the requisite showing. We therefore 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 of 2 --