US v. Willis Hayne

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case numbers: 8:98-cr-00520-PJM-1, 8:02-cv-03850-PJM. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998451027] [10-6872]

US v. Willis Hayne

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6872 Document: 14

Date Filed: 10/22/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6872 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIS MARK HAYNES, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:02-cv-03850-PJM; 8:98-cr-00520-PJM-1) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 22, 2010

Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willis Mark Haynes, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah A. Johnston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6872 Document: 14

Date Filed: 10/22/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Willis court's order Mark Haynes his seeks R. to Civ. appeal P. the district for

denying

Fed.

60(b)

motion

reconsideration of the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. not appealable unless a circuit justice or The order is issues a

judge

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

Haynes

requisite

showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 2

Case: 10-6872 Document: 14

Date Filed: 10/22/2010

Page: 3

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process. DISMISSED

3