United States v. Williams , 282 F. App'x 219 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6459
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MAURICE VICTOR WILLIAMS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
    Judge. (1:06-cr-00108-LMB-1; 1:07-cv-00912-LMB)
    Submitted:   May 12, 2008                 Decided:   June 13, 2008
    Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Maurice Victor Williams, Appellant Pro Se.   Kelli Hamby Ferry,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Maurice Victor Williams seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000) motion.
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues a certificate of appealability.        
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)
    (2000).   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 Williams 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: 08-6459

Citation Numbers: 282 F. App'x 219

Judges: Michael, Per Curiam, Shedd, Wilkins

Filed Date: 6/13/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024