United States v. Johnson , 210 F. App'x 242 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7504
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    TERRY KERMIT JOHNSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
    District Judge. (5:98-cr-00289-6; 5:03-cv-00049)
    Submitted:   November 17, 2006         Decided:     December 19, 2006
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Terry Kermit Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. Shappert,
    United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Terry Kermit Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000) motion.                   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   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 Johnson has not
    made the requisite showing.     Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability, dismiss the appeal, and deny Johnson’s motion for
    the 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 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-7504

Citation Numbers: 210 F. App'x 242

Judges: Niemeyer, Michael, King

Filed Date: 12/19/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024