United States v. Cross ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6190
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM TERRENCE CROSS, a/k/a Red,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 07-6594
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM TERRENCE CROSS, a/k/a Red,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (2:03-cr-00010-RBS; 2:06-cv-00457-RBS)
Submitted: October 10, 2007 Decided: October 24, 2007
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Terrence Cross, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
William Terrence Cross seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion
and his motion for reconsideration. The orders are 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 Cross has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
appeals. 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
- 3 -