United States v. Tracy ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7212
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CARL TRACY, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (9:02-cr-00518; 9:05-cv-00698)
Submitted: February 22, 2007 Decided: March 1, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carl Tracy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Carl Tracy, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and
denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. The orders are 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 Tracy 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
- 2 -