US v. Johney Freeman

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:88-cr-00076-jcc-2 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998395757] [10-6434]

US v. Johney Freeman

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6434 Document: 10

Date Filed: 08/05/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6434 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. JOHNEY FREEMAN, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:88-cr-00076-jcc-2) Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 5, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johney Freemen, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Joseph Seidel, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6434 Document: 10

Date Filed: 08/05/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Johney Freeman seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his "Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence" as a

successive motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. (2006). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a

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

Freeman

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: 10-6434 Document: 10

Date Filed: 08/05/2010

Page: 3

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. DISMISSED

3