United States v. Damon , 100 F. App'x 929 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 03-7975
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MARVIN JEROME DAMON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District
    Judge. (CR-95-45; CA-03-78-3)
    Submitted:   May 14, 2004                  Decided:   June 18, 2004
    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Marvin Jerome Damon, Appellant Pro Se. David John Novak, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Marvin Jerome Damon seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his motion filed under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
    (2000).     An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a
    § 2255 proceeding 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 for claims addressed by
    a district court 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
    (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 Damon has not made the requisite
    showing.
    Accordingly, we deny Damon 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: 03-7975

Citation Numbers: 100 F. App'x 929

Filed Date: 6/18/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021