United States v. Johnson , 282 F. App'x 273 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6262
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MAURICE JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (3:02-cr-00064-JPB-4)
Submitted: June 19, 2008 Decided: June 24, 2008
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maurice Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, Thomas
Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorneys, Martinsburg,
West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Maurice Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and
denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. The orders are
not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid
v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 Johnson 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 contentions are adequately presented in the
- 2 -
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -