US v. Gary White

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:03-cr-00181-FDW-DCK-6,3:09-cv-00443-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998637887]. Mailed to: Gary Dean White. [11-6226]

Appeal: 11-6226

Document: 12

Date Filed: 07/22/2011

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6226

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GARY DEAN WHITE, a/k/a G, a/k/a Sld Dft 3:03CR181-6,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:03-cr-00181-FDW-DCK-6; 3:09-cv-00443-FDW)

Submitted:

July 8, 2011

Decided:

July 22, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Dean White, Appellant Pro Se.
William A. Brafford,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy
Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6226

Document: 12

Date Filed: 07/22/2011

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Gary Dean White seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011)
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.
and

conclude

that

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record
White

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
before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED
2