United States v. Hardy , 196 F. App'x 227 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6527
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DONIKKI HARDY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (7:06-cr-00235-HMH; 7:06-cv-00082-HMH)
Submitted: August 24, 2006 Decided: August 30, 2006
Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donikki Hardy, Appellant Pro Se. Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Donikki Hardy seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and his motion
for reconsideration. 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 Hardy 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 -