US v. Craig Brown


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 2:05-cr-00017-WDK-TEM-1,2:07-cv-00156-WDK Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998454903] [10-6998]

Download PDF
US v. Craig Brown Doc. 0 Case: 10-6998 Document: 13 Date Filed: 10/28/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6998 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CRAIG LAMONT BROWN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:05-cr-00017-WDK-TEM-1; 2:07-cv-00156-WDK) Submitted: October 19, 2010 Decided: October 28, 2010 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Craig Lamont Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Calvin Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 10-6998 Document: 13 Date Filed: 10/28/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Craig Lamont Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion to reconsider the court's earlier denial of his motion to compel on the grounds that Brown sought successive relief under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2010). justice or judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2006). not issue absent "a A certificate of appealability will showing of the denial of a substantial 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. and conclude that Slack, We have independently reviewed the record Brown 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: 10-6998 Document: 13 Date Filed: 10/28/2010 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?