US v. James Rockett, III
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JAMES ROCKETT, III, a/k/a James Rocket, a/k/a James Rockett, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District Judge. (2:05-cr-00135-WDK-JEB-1; 2:07-cv-00336-WDK)
December 11, 2008
December 23, 2008
Before KING, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Rockett, III, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl James Mitchell, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: James court's motion. judge order Rockett, denying III, seeks on his to 28 appeal U.S.C. the district (2000)
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). issue absent "a
A certificate of appealability will not showing U.S.C. standard find the that of the denial of a A that the or
constitutional prisoner reasonable
right." this would by
§ 2253(c)(2) by any
demonstrating assessment is of
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 Rockett has not made the of we requisite showing. and Accordingly, dismiss for we the deny a
appealability deny Rockett's
transcripts and to expand the record.
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?