US v. Vincent Missouri

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [998545343-2]; denying Motion for other relief [998541944-2]; denying Motion to expedite decision [998526467-2] Originating case number: 6:00-cr-00498-MBS-1,6:10-cv-70250-MBS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998614949].. [10-7751]

Appeal: 10-7751

Document: 21

Date Filed: 06/20/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7751

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff ─ Appellee,
v.
VINCENT MISSOURI,
Defendant ─ Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
Margaret B. Seymour, District
Judge. (6:00-cr-00498-MBS-1; 6:10-cv-70250-MBS)

Submitted:

June 16, 2011

Before NIEMEYER and
Senior Circuit Judge.

GREGORY,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

June 20, 2011

and

HAMILTON,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vincent Missouri, Appellant Pro Se.
David Calhoun Stephens,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-7751

Document: 21

Date Filed: 06/20/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Vincent Missouri seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010)
motion.
judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).
issue

absent

“a

of

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

appealability.

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

of

a

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.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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 Missouri has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
certificate
dispense

we
of

with

deny

Missouri’s

pending

motions,

dismiss

the

appealability,

and

oral

because

argument

2

the

deny

appeal.

facts

and

a
We

legal

Appeal: 10-7751

Document: 21

Date Filed: 06/20/2011

Page: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3