US v. Paul Casto
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PAUL FREDERICK CASTO, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00041-IMK-JSK-1; 1:07-cv-00135-IMKJSK)
June 15, 2009
July 1, 2009
Before KING and Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul Frederick Casto, Appellant Pro Se. Shawn Angus Morgan, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Paul court's order Frederick accepting Casto the seeks to appeal of the district
judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion and the district court's order denying a
certificate of appealability. unless a circuit justice or
These orders are not appealable judge issues a certificate of
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006).
A certificate of
appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." (2006). 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 Casto has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. moot Casto's motion to expedite.
We deny as
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?