US v. Clarence Hicks

Filing 920081117

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7067

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CLARENCE HICKS, a/k/a Bunky, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (1:98-cr-00259-BEL-9; 1:02-cv-02076-BEL)

Submitted:

November 5, 2008

Decided:

November 17, 2008

Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge.

MICHAEL,

Circuit

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clarence Hicks, Appellant Pro Se. Assistant United States Attorney, Appellee.

Robert Reeves Harding, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Clarence Hicks seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for

reconsideration of the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. unless a circuit justice or judge The order is not appealable issues a certificate of

appealability. 369 F.3d 363,

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." (2000). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating

that reasonable jurists would 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). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hicks has not made the of requisite showing. and Accordingly, dismiss the the we deny a We legal

certificate dispense

appealability oral argument

appeal. and

with

because

facts

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2