United States v. Johnson , 357 F. App'x 525 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7591
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    WENDELL ANTONIO JOHNSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.    Samuel J. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:04-cr-00128-sgw-mfu-1; 7:09-cv-80139-sgw-mfu)
    Submitted:    December 15, 2009            Decided:   December 21, 2009
    Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Wendell Antonio Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis,
    Assistant  United   States  Attorney,  Roanoke,  Virginia,  for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Wendell Antonio Johnson seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (West Supp.
    2009) motion.          The order is not appealable unless a circuit
    justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.                              See 
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (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).           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.                  See 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 materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-7591

Citation Numbers: 357 F. App'x 525

Judges: Michael, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/21/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024