United States v. Deveaux , 117 F. App'x 299 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-7429
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    LEROY MAURICE DEVEAUX,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
    Judge. (CR-01-96; CA-03-3865-5-22)
    Submitted:   December 8, 2004          Decided:     December 29, 2004
    Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Leroy Maurice DeVeaux, Appellant Pro Se.          William Kenneth
    Witherspoon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Leroy    Maurice    DeVeaux       seeks      to    appeal    the    district
    court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000).         An appeal may not be taken from the final order in
    a proceeding under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000) unless a circuit justice
    or   judge     issues     a    certificate       of    appealability.             
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)(B) (2000).            A certificate of appealability will not
    issue    for     claims       addressed    by     a    district         court    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      his
    constitutional         claims    are   debatable        and      that    any     dispositive
    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
    wrong.       See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336 (2003);
    Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683 (4th Cir. 2001).                 We have independently reviewed the
    record   and     conclude       that   DeVeaux        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: 04-7429

Citation Numbers: 117 F. App'x 299

Filed Date: 12/29/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021