United States v. Norvel Woodson , 589 F. App'x 85 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-7136
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    NORVEL LEE WOODSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Beckley.        Irene C. Berger,
    District Judge. (5:09-cr-00191-1; 5:12-cv-02529; 5:14-cv-16725)
    Submitted:   December 18, 2014            Decided:   December 22, 2014
    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Norvel Lee Woodson, Appellant Pro Se. Gary L. Call, John J.
    Frail, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charleston, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Norvel        Lee   Woodson     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 (2012) motion.
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues      a      certificate        of        appealability.                28      U.S.C.
    § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).            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) (2012).                   When the
    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
    this    standard     by    demonstrating        that   reasonable        jurists       would
    find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
    claims is debatable or wrong.               Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    ,
    484    (2000);     see    Miller-El   v.    Cockrell,       
    537 U.S. 322
    ,    336-38
    (2003).     When the district court denies relief on procedural
    grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive
    procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a
    debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                              
    Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85
    .
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Woodson 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
    2
    contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-7136

Citation Numbers: 589 F. App'x 85

Judges: Shedd, Wynn, Thacker

Filed Date: 12/22/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024