United States v. Dawson , 352 F. App'x 823 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7061
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RONALD DAWSON, a/k/a Tree,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.     Louise W. Flanagan,
    Chief District Judge. (5:06-cr-00061-FL-1; 5:08-cv-00298-FL)
    Submitted:    November 17, 2009            Decided:   November 23, 2009
    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ronald Dawson, Appellant Pro Se.      Edward D. Gray, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald       Dawson   seeks       to    appeal      the    district        court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    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 Dawson 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: 09-7061

Citation Numbers: 352 F. App'x 823

Judges: King, Michael, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 11/23/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023