US v. Kenneth Therrien, Jr.

Filing 920091203

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7493

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. KENNETH CHARLES THERRIEN, JR., Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (6:07-cr-00021-HFF-1; 6:09-cv-70061-HFF)

Submitted:

November 19, 2009

Decided:

December 3, 2009

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Charles Therrien, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Kenneth Charles Therrien, Jr., seeks to appeal the

district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. unless a circuit justice or The order is not appealable issues a certificate of

judge

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 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 Therrien has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Therrien's

motion for a certificate of appealability, dismiss the appeal, and deny his motion for extension of time to supplement his appeal. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional

contentions the court

would

process. DISMISSED 2