United States v. Qualo Lowery , 490 F. App'x 582 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-7114
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    QUALO MARTEZ LOWERY,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.    Robert J. Conrad,
    Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:05-cr-00216-RJC-2; 3:09-cv-00260-
    RJC)
    Submitted:   November 28, 2012            Decided:   December 3, 2012
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Qualo Martez Lowery, Appellant Pro Se.       Amy Elizabeth Ray,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Qualo     Martez    Lowery        seeks    to     appeal      the    district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
     (West
    Supp.    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)         (2006).             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)
    (2006).    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 Lowery 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: 12-7114

Citation Numbers: 490 F. App'x 582

Filed Date: 12/3/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021