US v. Rice

Filing 920070601

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6020 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NATHANIEL DANTE RICE, Defendant - Appellant. No. 07-6178 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NATHANIEL DANTE RICE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:02-cr-00153-JAB; 1:05-cv-00574-JAB) Submitted: April 25, 2007 Decided: June 1, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathaniel Dante Rice, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Nathaniel Dante Rice seeks to appeal the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion and denying his motions for reconsideration and an extension of time to file a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. The orders are 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." 2253(c)(2) (2000). that A prisoner satisfies would this 28 U.S.C. standard that by any demonstrating reasonable jurists find 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 Rice has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of We dispense with oral appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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 - 3 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?