United States v. Hutchens

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RANDOLPH DENNIS HUTCHENS, II,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,
District Judge. (3:00-cr-00029-WCB; 3:05-cv-00113-WCB)
Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 6, 2007
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin David Mills, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant.
Robert H. McWilliams, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney,
Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Randolph Dennis Hutchens, II, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the
magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255(2000) motion. The order 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 that Hutchens 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 -