United States v. Law , 403 F. App'x 791 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-6987
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DARRELL LAW, a/k/a B,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.     Irene M. Keeley,
    District Judge.    (1:06-cr-00020-IMK-DJJ-9; 1:08-cv-00171-IMK-
    DJJ)
    Submitted:   November 18, 2010             Decided:   December 1, 2010
    Before SHEDD and    AGEE,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Darrell Law, Appellant Pro Se.         Zelda Elizabeth Wesley,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Darrell Law seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
    relief on his 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
     (West Supp. 2010) motion.                                        The
    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
    a certificate of appealability.                        
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (2006).
    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) (2006).                         When the district court denies
    relief   on    the    merits,          a    prisoner         satisfies       this    standard      by
    demonstrating        that        reasonable            jurists    would        find       that    the
    district      court’s          assessment       of      the    constitutional            claims    is
    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        Law     has       not        made     the     requisite          showing.
    Accordingly,         we        deny     Law’s      motion        for     a     certificate        of
    appealability and dismiss the appeal.                             We dispense with oral
    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    2
    presented in the materials before the court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-6987

Citation Numbers: 403 F. App'x 791

Judges: Shedd, Agee, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/1/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024