US v. David Wilson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case numbers: 1:95-cr-00006-jct-mfu-1,1:10-cv-80240-jct-mfu. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998484417] [10-6667]

US v. David Wilson

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6667 Document: 11

Date Filed: 12/14/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6667 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID A. WILSON, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (1:95-cr-00006-jct-mfu-1; 1:10-cv-80240-jctmfu) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: December 14, 2010

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David A. Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Rick A. Mountcastle, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6667 Document: 11 PER CURIAM:

Date Filed: 12/14/2010

Page: 2

David A. Wilson seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. unless a circuit justice or The order is not appealable issues a certificate of

judge

appealability. 369 F.3d 363,

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." (2006). prisoner reasonable 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a satisfies jurists this would standard find that by the demonstrating district that

court's

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). denies relief both on procedural the When the district court the prisoner ruling must is

grounds,

demonstrate

that

dispositive

procedural

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that the district court properly dismissed his motion and Wilson has not made the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. DISMISSED 2