United States v. Hassan Hammoud ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-6964
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    HASSAN HAMMOUD,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.    Richard D. Bennett, District Judge.
    (1:14-cr-00017-RDB-1; 1:15-cv-03239-RDB)
    Submitted:   November 17, 2016              Decided:   December 12, 2016
    Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Hassan Hammoud, Appellant Pro Se. Judson T. Mihok, Sandra
    Wilkinson,   Assistant  United States Attorneys, Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Hassan Hammoud seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     motion.                      The order is not
    appealable       unless       a    circuit       justice     or    judge     issues     a
    certificate of appealability.                
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)(B) (2012).
    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) (2012).                   When the district court denies
    relief    on    the    merits,     a     prisoner    satisfies     this    standard    by
    demonstrating that “reasonable jurists would find the district
    court’s    assessment        of    the    constitutional      claims      debatable    or
    wrong.”        Slack    v.    McDaniel,      
    529 U.S. 473
    ,   484     (2000);    see
    Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336-38 (2003).                           When the
    district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner
    must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is
    debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
    denial of a constitutional right.                 Slack, 
    529 U.S. at 484-85
    .
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
    Hammoud 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
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-6964

Judges: Keenan, Wynn, Diaz

Filed Date: 12/12/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024