US v. Timothy Murphy
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY LAFON MURPHY, a/k/a TJ, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:04-cr-00241-FL-1; 5:08-cv-00534-FL)
March 16, 2010
March 22, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Lafon Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Robert Jack Higdon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Timothy court's order Lafon Murphy the seeks to appeal of the district
judge and dismissing as untimely 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 Murphy has not made the requisite showing. motion appeal. legal before for a certificate of Accordingly, we deny Murphy's appealability and dismiss the
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and are and adequately argument presented not in the the materials decisional
contentions the court
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?