United States v. Powell , 155 F. App'x 725 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-6007
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    TROY JAMES POWELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
    District Judge. (CR-01-5; CA-4-154)
    Submitted:   November 22, 2005            Decided:   December 1, 2005
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Troy James Powell, Appellant Pro Se.    Gretchen C. F. Shappert,
    United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Troy James Powell, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal
    the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under
    
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000).            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    the    district      court’s    assessment      of    his
    constitutional      claims     is   debatable     or    wrong   and    that    any
    dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also
    debatable or wrong.          See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    ,
    336-38 (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 Powell has not made the
    requisite showing.       Accordingly, we deny Powell’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: 05-6007

Citation Numbers: 155 F. App'x 725

Judges: Motz, Traxler, Gregory

Filed Date: 12/1/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024