US v. Balford Evans


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:06-cr-00415-AW-1,8:08-cv-00068-AW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998421996] [09-6778]

Download PDF
US v. Balford Evans Doc. 0 Case: 09-6778 Document: 20 Date Filed: 09/10/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6778 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. BALFORD EVANS, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:06-cr-00415-AW-1; 8:08-cv-00068-AW) Submitted: August 17, 2010 Decided: September 10, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Balford Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Assistant United States Attorney, Appellee. Barbara Suzanne Skalla, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 09-6778 Document: 20 Date Filed: 09/10/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Balford Evans seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 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 of the denial of a substantial constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner reasonable satisfies jurists this would standard find that by the demonstrating district that court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). denies relief both on procedural the When the district court the prisoner ruling must is grounds, demonstrate that dispositive procedural debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. We have independently reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. record and conclude that Evans has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, and dismiss the appeal. we deny a certificate of appealability We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 2 Case: 09-6778 Document: 20 Date Filed: 09/10/2010 Page: 3 materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?