United States v. Joseph Wing , 458 F. App'x 279 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-7001
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    JOSEPH EVELYN WING,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (5:09-cr-00010-F-1; 5:10-cv-00170-F)
    Submitted:   December 15, 2011            Decided:   December 19, 2011
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Joseph Evelyn Wing, Appellant Pro Se. Joe Exum, Jr., Jennifer P.
    May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Joshua Bryan
    Royster, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Joseph       Evelyn     Wing   seeks      to      appeal      the     district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
     (West
    Supp.    2011)    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 Wing
    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
    2
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-7001

Citation Numbers: 458 F. App'x 279

Filed Date: 12/19/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021