US v. Lawrence Davis
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LAWRENCE STAFFORD DAVIS, a/k/a Larry, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:06-cr-01317-TLW-1; 4:08-cv-70126-TLW)
July 10, 2009
July 23, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Stafford Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Lawrence Stafford Davis seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. The order is not appealable unless a
circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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 prisoner reasonable right." this would by 28 U.S.C. standard find the that § 2253(c)(2) by any (2006). A that the or
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 Davis has not made the of requisite showing. Accordingly, deny Davis's we deny a for
appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal.
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?