US v. Charles Izac
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHARLES D. IZAC, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John P. Bailey, District Judge. (3:02-cr-00058-JPB-JES-1; 3:08-cv-00093-JPB)
March 17, 2009
March 23, 2009
Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles D. Izac, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Charles D. Izac seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying motion. judge relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008)
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
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 Izac has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate We dispense with oral
of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
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?