United States v. Carr , 139 F. App'x 561 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-6217
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ADAM NICKLOUS CARR,
    Defendant -   Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
    Chief District Judge. (CR-01-126; CA-04-187-1)
    Submitted:   July 14, 2005                 Decided:   July 22, 2005
    Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Adam Nicklous Carr, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Cannon, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Adam Nicklous Carr seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his motion filed under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
    (2000).    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
    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
    , 336-38 (2003);
    Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683 (4th Cir. 2001).        We have independently reviewed the
    record and conclude that Carr has not made the requisite showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
    appeal.     We also deny Carr’s pending motions for “disclosure of
    grand jury minutes” and for an “extraordindary writ” under Fed. R.
    App. P. 21(c).     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: 05-6217

Citation Numbers: 139 F. App'x 561

Judges: Luttig, Motz, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 7/22/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023