United States v. Chiles , 358 F. App'x 441 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7440
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    EMORY TAYLOR CHILES,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Wheeling.    Frederick P. Stamp,
    Jr., Senior District Judge.  (5:05-cr-00018-FPS-JES-1; 5:07-cv-
    00065-FPS-JES)
    Submitted:    December 17, 2009            Decided:   December 29, 2009
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Emory Taylor Chiles, Appellant Pro Se.   Randolph John Bernard,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Emory     Taylor     Chiles         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.
    2009) 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).             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 Chiles 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
    2
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-7440

Citation Numbers: 358 F. App'x 441

Filed Date: 12/29/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021