FERNANDO GAITAN JR., District Judge
On February 13, 2007, this Court entered an Order (Doc. No. 11) denying movant's motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. No. 1). On February 26, 2007, movant filed a notice of appeal, which this Court will construe as a Motion for Certificate of Appealability (Doc. No. 13).
A certificate of appealability will be issued only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and has indicated which specific issue or issues satisfy the showing required. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (3). Additionally, "the petitioner `must demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues [in a different manner]; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.'"Randolf v. Kemna, 276 F.3d 401, 403 n. 1 (8th Cir. 2002) (quotingBarefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n. 1 (1983)) (alteration in original). Although this may be referred to as a "modest standard," id. (citing Charles v. Hickman, 228 F.3d 981, 982 n. 1 (9th Cir. 2000)), movant has failed to meet this burden.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that movant's Petition for a Certificate of Appealability (Doc. No. 13) is DENIED.