US v. Garrett Smith

Filing 920081029


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7206 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARRETT DON SMITH, a/k/a/ Garrin David Smith, Defendant - Appellant. No. 08-7215 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GARRETT DON SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson , Jr., District Judge. (6:04-cr-00466-GRA-1; 6:08-cv-70067-GRA; 6:05cv-02932-GRA) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 29, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Garrett Don Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Leesa Washington, Assistant United States Attorney, Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Garrett Don Smith seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion, dismissing denying his his subsequent to a 2255 as motions moot. as The or successive, orders judge are issues and not a A "a motion unless amend circuit appealable justice 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 standard demonstrating reasonable jurists 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). appeal and We have independently reviewed the record in each conclude that Smith has not made the requisite showing. dismiss Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and the appeals. We grant Smith's motion to amend the informal brief and dispense with oral argument because the facts 3 and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 4

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?