United States v. Bowman , 213 F. App'x 207 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7201
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHRISTOPHER WAYNE BOWMAN,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
    District Judge. (5:01-cr-00033-2; 5:06-cv-00067)
    Submitted: January 18, 2006                 Decided:   January 22, 2007
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Christopher Wayne Bowman, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert,
    United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Christopher Wayne Bowman seeks to appeal the district
    court’s orders denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     (2000) motion
    and subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration.
    The orders are 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   his
    constitutional   claims   are   debatable   and    that   any    dispositive
    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
    wrong.    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336 (2003);
    Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 
    369 F.3d 363
    , 371 (4th Cir. 2004); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683 (4th
    Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Bowman 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 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-7201

Citation Numbers: 213 F. App'x 207

Judges: Gregory, Per Curiam, Traxler, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 1/22/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023