United States v. Callum , 269 F. App'x 300 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7528
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JERMAINE M. CALLUM, a/k/a Main,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.
    (3:04-cr-00048-nkm; 7:06-cv-00472-nkm)
    Submitted:   January 23, 2008              Decided:   March 5, 2008
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jermaine M. Callum, Appellant Pro Se. William Frederick Gould,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia,
    for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Jermaine M. Callum seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on 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 Callum 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: 07-7528

Citation Numbers: 269 F. App'x 300

Judges: King, Michael, Niemeyer, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 3/5/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023