United States v. Castro , 120 F. App'x 487 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-7200
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MARIO OCHOA CASTRO,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    No. 04-7201
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MARIO OCHOA CASTRO,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham.   Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CR-02-83; CR-02-48; CA-03-851-1)
    Submitted:   January 27, 2005             Decided:   February 2, 2005
    Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Mario Ochoa Castro, Appellant Pro Se.      Sandra Jane Hairston,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    - 2 -
    PER CURIAM:
    Mario Ochoa Castro seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his motion filed under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000).
    An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255
    proceeding 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 for claims addressed by a district
    court   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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that
    any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also
    debatable or wrong.       See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336
    (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,
    
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683 (4th Cir. 2001).             We have independently reviewed
    the record and conclude that Castro 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
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-7200, 04-7201

Citation Numbers: 120 F. App'x 487

Judges: Luttig, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 2/2/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/18/2024