US v. Eddie McNeill

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:04-cr-00126-NCT-1,1:08-cv-00261-NCT-PTS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998679310]. Mailed to: Eddie L. McNeill. [11-6808]

Appeal: 11-6808

Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/16/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6808

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
EDDIE LAVON MCNEILL,
Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge.
(1:04-cr-00126-NCT-1; 1:08-cv00261-NCT-PTS)

Submitted:

September 13, 2011

Decided:

September 16, 2011

Before AGEE, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eddie Lavon McNeill, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6808

Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/16/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Eddie
court’s

order

Lavon

McNeill

accepting

the

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

of

the
the

district
magistrate

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2011) motion and subsequent motion to alter or amend judgment
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
unless

a

circuit

appealability.

justice

The orders are not appealable

or

judge

issues

a

certificate

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

of

A certificate

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2006).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

ruling

is

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
denial of a constitutional right.
We

have

independently

reviewed

the

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.
record

McNeill has not made the requisite showing.

and

conclude

that

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because
2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 11-6808

Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/16/2011

Page: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3