US v. John Hounchell


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 6:08-cr-00319-GRA-1,6:09-cv-70132-GRA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998456716] [10-6581]

Download PDF
US v. John Hounchell Doc. 0 Case: 10-6581 Document: 11 Date Filed: 11/01/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6581 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN MICHAEL HOUNCHELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:08-cr-00319-GRA-1; 6:09-cv-70132-GRA) Submitted: October 19, 2010 Decided: November 1, 2010 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Michael Hounchell, Appellant Pro Se. Maxwell B. Cauthen, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 10-6581 Document: 11 Date Filed: 11/01/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: John Michael Hounchell seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 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 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 Hounchell 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: 10-6581 Document: 11 Date Filed: 11/01/2010 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?