US v. Lloyd Williams
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. LLOYD ANTHONIE WILLIAMS, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (4:98-cr-00144-LHT-1; 1:06-cv-00193-LHT)
October 30, 2008
January 12, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lloyd Anthonie Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, Assistant United States Attorney, Jerry Wayne Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Lloyd Anthonie Williams seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 2006 & West Supp. 2008) motion and his motion to reconsider. The orders are 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
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. by § 2253(c)(2) (2006). that A prisoner satisfies would this 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). that we We have independently has not made motions reviewed the for the record and
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
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?