US v. Sam Westry


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998254521-2], denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998302811-2]. Originating case numbers: 3:04-cr-00267-RLW-1,3:07-cv-00400-RLW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998424141] [09-7879]

Download PDF
US v. Sam Westry Doc. 0 Case: 09-7879 Document: 15 Date Filed: 09/14/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7879 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. SAM WESTRY, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:04-cr-00267-RLW-1; 3:07-cv-00400-RLW) Submitted: August 11, 2010 Decided: September 14, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sam Westry, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Steven Dry, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 09-7879 Document: 15 Date Filed: 09/14/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Sam Westry seeks to appeal the district court's order denying motion. judge relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 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 satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. 529 U.S. at 484-85. Slack, We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Westry has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 2 Case: 09-7879 Document: 15 Date Filed: 09/14/2010 Page: 3 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?