UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 06-7658



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


LIBAN M. MOHAMUD,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (5:02-cr-00044-FPS; 5:03-cv-00227-FPS)


Submitted:   February 16, 2007             Decided:   March 27, 2007


Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Sidney Leighton Moore, III, TROUTMAN & SANDERS, LLP, Atlanta,
Georgia, for Appellant. John Castle Parr, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Randolph John Bernard, Assistant United States
Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

           Liban M. Mohamud seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on 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,

, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 

, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 

, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).            We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mohamud 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 -