United States v. Moise ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7884
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MARJORIE MOISE, a/k/a Jane Doe, a/k/a Katrina
Yates,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (CR-95-194, CA-01-2896-9-8)
Submitted: April 30, 2003 Decided: July 18, 2003
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marjorie Moise, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Marjorie Moise appeals from the order of the district court
denying relief on her motion to vacate, set aside, or correct her
sentence, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). In reviewing
the denial of a § 2255 motion, this court may only grant a
certificate of appealability if the appellant makes a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). The relevant inquiry is whether “‘reasonable
jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the
constitutional claims debatable or wrong.’” Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003) (quoting Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). Assuming without deciding
that equitable tolling applies, we conclude that Moise has failed
to make this showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Moise’s motion
for appointment of counsel. 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