US v. Timothy Nixon
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:00-cr-00222-GCM-1,3:06-cv-00024-GCM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998536780] [10-7484]
US v. Timothy Nixon
Doc. 0
Case: 10-7484
Document: 8
Date Filed: 03/03/2011
Page: 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7484
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY JEROME NIXON, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:00-cr-00222-GCM-1; 3:06-cv-00024-GCM)
Submitted:
February 24, 2011
Decided:
March 3, 2011
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Jerome Nixon, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, Appellee.
Elizabeth Ray, Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Dockets.Justia.com
Case: 10-7484
Document: 8
Date Filed: 03/03/2011
Page: 2
PER CURIAM: Timothy court's order Jerome Nixon Fed. seeks R. to appeal P. the district for
denying
his
Civ.
59(e)
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
Nixon
requisite
showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 2
Case: 10-7484
Document: 8
Date Filed: 03/03/2011
Page: 3
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 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?