United States v. Blackmon , 275 F. App'x 188 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6184
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DANNY L. BLACKMON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (7:03-cr-00077-F-1; 7:07-cv-00126-F)
Submitted: April 18, 2008 Decided: April 24, 2008
Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Danny L. Blackmon, Appellant Pro Se. George Edward Bell Holding,
United States Attorney. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United
States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina; Alan Fitzgerald Williams,
Major, OFFICE OF THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE, Camp Lejeune, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Danny L. Blackmon seeks to appeal the district court’s
judgment denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The
judgment 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 Blackmon has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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 -