United States v. Morris Hayden , 501 F. App'x 226 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 12-7683
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MORRIS RANECO HAYDEN,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
    Judge. (0:09-cr-00499-CMC-1; 0:12-cv-01953-CMC)
    Submitted:   December 13, 2012            Decided:   December 19, 2012
    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Morris Raneco Hayden, Appellant Pro Se.        William Kenneth
    Witherspoon, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Morris    Raneco     Hayden         seeks    to    appeal    the     district
    court’s    order    dismissing      as    untimely       his    
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
    (West Supp. 2012) motion.           The order is not appealable unless a
    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
    
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)(B)         (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).    When the district court denies relief on the merits, a
    prisoner     satisfies      this         standard        by     demonstrating          that
    reasonable     jurists      would        find     that    the        district      court’s
    assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
    Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
    Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336-38 (2003).                    When the district court
    denies     relief     on    procedural          grounds,        the     prisoner        must
    demonstrate    both     that   the       dispositive          procedural     ruling      is
    debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
    denial of a constitutional right.                Slack, 
    529 U.S. at 484-85
    .
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Hayden 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
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-7683

Citation Numbers: 501 F. App'x 226

Judges: Floyd, Motz, Per Curiam, Wynn

Filed Date: 12/19/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024