                              UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 08-7550


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                  Plaintiff - Appellee,

             v.

C. WAYNE BERRY,

                  Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:08-cv-00201-RAJ; 2:05-cr-00155-RAJ-FBS-1)


Submitted:    November 20, 2008           Decided:   December 1, 2008


Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


C. Wayne Berry, Appellant Pro Se. Robert John Krask, Assistant
United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            C. Wayne Berry seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

The order is 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district

court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural

ruling by the district court is likewise debatable.                            Miller-

El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th

Cir.   2001).        We   have    independently          reviewed     the   record   and

conclude      that    Berry      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
