US v. Calvin Buchanan

Filing 920080624

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6293 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CALVIN E. BUCHANAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (5:02-cr-30020-sgw-3; 7:07-cv-00206-sgw-mfu) Submitted: June 19, 2008 Decided: June 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin Eugene Buchanan, Appellant Pro Se. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Calvin Eugene Buchanan 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 Buchanan has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Buchanan's motion for 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?