US v. Gwendolyn Hedgepeth

Filing 920091230

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7661

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GWENDOLYN CHEEK HEDGEPETH, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:03-cr-00297-HEH-1; 3:09-cv-00346-HEH)

Submitted:

December 17, 2009

Decided:

December 30, 2009

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gwendolyn Cheek Hedgepeth, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Gwendolyn Cheek Hedgepeth seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as successive her 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

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 Hedgepeth 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