United States v. Abdi Dire ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-6163
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ABDI WALI DIRE,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge.
    (2:10-cr-00056-MSD-FBS-3; 2:13-cv-00717-MSD)
    Submitted:   June 23, 2016                  Decided:   June 28, 2016
    Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Abdi Wali Dire, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Abdi Wali Dire seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2012) 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) (2012).
    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) (2012).      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
    Dire 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   this    court   and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-6163

Judges: Motz, King, Wynn

Filed Date: 6/28/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024