US v. Brown

Filing 920071221

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6630 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LANCE L. BROWN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:03-cr-00153-HEH; 3:05-cv-00833-HEH) Submitted: September 19, 2007 Decided: December 21, 2007 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lance L. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Philip Rosenberg, States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, Rina C. Tucker, STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., Stephen Miller, Charles Everett James, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. United UNITED Wiley STATES Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lance L. Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order granting limited relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion and dismissing the motion without prejudice. 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 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 -

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?