United States v. Brown , 333 F. App'x 745 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-6999
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    JOVON MONTRAL BROWN,
    Defendant – Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Newport News.      Jerome B. Friedman,
    District Judge. (4:06-cr-00138-JFB-JEB-1, 4:08-cv-00058-JBF)
    Submitted:    October 15, 2009              Decided:   October 21, 2009
    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jovon Montral Brown, Appellant Pro Se.          Scott      W.   Putney,
    Assistant United States Attorney, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Jovon    Montral       Brown    seeks      to    appeal      the    district
    court’s      order    denying       relief      on     his     
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
    (West Supp. 2009) motion.            The order is not appealable unless a
    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
    
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (2006).                  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)         (2006).        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 Brown 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: 09-6999

Citation Numbers: 333 F. App'x 745

Judges: Agee, Duncan, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 10/21/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023