United States v. Bernard , 289 F. App'x 652 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6398
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RICHARD DWIGHT BERNARD,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.     James R. Spencer, Chief
    District Judge. (3:03-cr-00420-JRS-3; 3:06-cv-00571-JRS)
    Submitted:   August 14, 2008                 Decided:   August 19, 2008
    Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Richard Dwight Bernard, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Everett James,
    Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Richard Dwight Bernard 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 Bernard 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: 08-6398

Citation Numbers: 289 F. App'x 652

Judges: Michael, Wilkins, Hamilton

Filed Date: 8/19/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024