US v. Martez Sherrod

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 4:04-cr-00075-D-1,4:08-cv-00107-D Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998538643] [10-6745]

US v. Martez Sherrod

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6745

Document: 12

Date Filed: 03/07/2011

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6745

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. MARTEZ LAMONT SHERROD, Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (4:04-cr-00075-D-1; 4:08-cv-00107-D)

Submitted:

February 28, 2011

Decided:

March 7, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Martez Lamont Sherrod, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Edward D. Gray, States Attorneys,

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6745

Document: 12

Date Filed: 03/07/2011

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Martez court's order Lamont denying Sherrod relief seeks on to appeal 28 the district § 2255

his

U.S.C.A.

(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 Sherrod 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: 10-6745

Document: 12

Date Filed: 03/07/2011

Page: 3

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. DISMISSED

3