Walter Gonzalez filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, seeking relief based on United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and based on two criminal-history issues he did not pursue on direct appeal. The district court 1 denied Gonzalez’s motion, but granted a certificate of appealability (COA) on *875 whether the rule announced in Booker applies retroactively to cases on collateral review. We have since concluded that it does not. See Never Misses A Shot v. United States, 413 F.3d 781, 783-84 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam). Further, Gonzalez has not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right so as to justify expanding the scope of the COA to include his criminal-history arguments. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Pruitt v. United States, 233 F.3d 570, 572-73 (8th Cir. 2000) (appellate review of ruling on § 2255 motion is limited to issues specified in COA), cert. denied, 533 U.S. 932, 121 S.Ct. 2557, 150 L.Ed.2d 722 (2001). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.