US v. Carlos Darden

Filing 920080310

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7648 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CARLOS DEMORIS DARDEN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (4:04-cr-00046-H; 4:07-cv-00087-H) Submitted: February 28, 2008 Decided: March 10, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carlos Demoris Darden, Appellant Pro Se. George Edward Bell Holding, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Carlos Demoris Darden seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. (2000). 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a 28 substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000). demonstrating that A prisoner satisfies this standard by jurists would find that any reasonable 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 Darden has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of We dispense with oral appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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?