United States v. Bellamy , 361 F. App'x 514 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7386
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JAMES LARRY BELLAMY,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (7:99-cr-00049-F-2; 7:03-cv-00015-F)
    Submitted:    December 17, 2009            Decided:   December 29, 2009
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Larry Bellamy, Appellant Pro Se.    Anne Margaret Hayes,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    James      Larry      Bellamy       seeks       to    appeal      the     district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
     (West
    Supp.    2009)    motion.         The     order     is     not    appealable         unless   a
    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
    
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (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).        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 Bellamy has
    not made the requisite showing.                    Accordingly, we deny Bellamy’s
    motion    for     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: 09-7386

Citation Numbers: 361 F. App'x 514

Filed Date: 12/29/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021