US v. Jonathan Mathis
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JONATHAN JOSEPH MATHIS, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:06-cr-00815-HMH-1; 6:08-cv-70034-HMH)
November 13, 2008
November 19, 2008
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by published per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Falkner Wilkes, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Jonathan Joseph Mathis seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and his motion for reconsideration. appealable unless a circuit justice or The orders are not judge issues a A "a
certificate of appealability. certificate of appealability
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). will not issue absent
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. by § 2253(c)(2) (2000). 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 record (4th and Cir. 2001). that We have independently not made reviewed the the
Accordingly, we deny Mathis's motion for a certificate We also deny Mathis's with oral argument
of appealability and dismiss the appeal. motion for limited remand. We
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?