US v. Manuel Carrizoza

Filing 920090630

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8318

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. MANUEL CARRIZOZA, Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:02-cr-00045-LHT-1; 1:05-cv-00305-LHT)

Submitted:

June 10, 2009

Decided:

June 30, 2009

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Henry Marines, LAW OFFICE OF HENRY MARINES, Miami, Florida, for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Manuel Carrizoza seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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

substantial 28

constitutional prisoner reasonable

right." this would by

§ 2253(c)(2) by any

(2006).

satisfies jurists

demonstrating assessment is of

constitutional

claims

district

court

debatable

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 Carrizoza has not made the requisite showing. certificate dispense of appealability oral argument and Accordingly, we deny a the appeal. and We legal

dismiss the

with

because

facts

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

DISMISSED

2