US v. Michael Puzey


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998237721-2] Originating case number: 3:00-cr-00057-JPB-JES-16,3:04-cv-00063-JPB-JES Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998415242] [09-7936]

Download PDF
US v. Michael Puzey Doc. 0 Case: 09-7936 Document: 11 Date Filed: 08/31/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7936 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL PAUL PUZEY, a/k/a Big Pete, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00057-JPB-JES-16; 3:04-cv-00063JPB-JES) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Paul Puzey, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 09-7936 Document: 11 Date Filed: 08/31/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Michael court's judge order and Paul Puzey the Fed. seeks to appeal of the the district magistrate motion on his for 28 accepting his a recommendation R. order Civ. P. denying of 60(b) relief reconsideration prior denying U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. appealable unless a circuit justice or The order is not judge issues a certificate of appealability. Reid v. Angelone, of 369 F.3d 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2006); 363, will 369 not (4th issue Cir. 2004). "a A certificate appealability absent substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006). relief on the merits, that a When the district court denies satisfies would this standard that claims 473, by the is 484 prisoner demonstrating district debatable reasonable of v. jurists the find court's or assessment Slack constitutional 529 U.S. wrong. McDaniel, (2000); see Miller-El v. 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. at 484-85. that We have independently has not made reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. the record and conclude Puzey requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Puzey's motion for appointment of counsel, 2 Case: 09-7936 Document: 11 Date Filed: 08/31/2010 Page: 3 deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. dispense with oral argument because the facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 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?