United States v. Reid , 197 F. App'x 244 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-6798
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CARLOS VANCE REID,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston.   Patrick Michael Duffy, District
    Judge. (2:99-cr-00460-PMD; 2:06-cv-00202-PMD)
    Submitted: August 24, 2006                 Decided: August 31, 2006
    Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Carlos Vance Reid, Appellant Pro Se. Brent Alan Gray, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Carlos Vance Reid seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order 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,
    
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484
    (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).          We have
    independently reviewed the record and conclude that Reid has not
    made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Reid’s motion for
    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 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-6798

Citation Numbers: 197 F. App'x 244

Judges: King, Shedd, Duncan

Filed Date: 8/31/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024