US v. Gwendolyn Hedgepeth

Filing 920091230

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7661 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GWENDOLYN CHEEK HEDGEPETH, Defendant -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 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

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?