United States v. Collins , 283 F. App'x 95 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6427
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RALPH COLLINS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
    Judge. (2:04-cr-00004-JBF-TEM-4; 2:07-CV-00344-JBF)
    Submitted:   June 26, 2008                  Decided:   July 2, 2008
    Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ralph Collins, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Calvin Moore, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ralph Collins seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    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 Collins has not
    made the requisite showing.       Accordingly, we deny Collins’ motion
    for 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: 08-6427

Citation Numbers: 283 F. App'x 95

Judges: Duncan, King, Per Curiam, Wilkins

Filed Date: 7/2/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023