US v. Todd Lamar Mo

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:05-cr-00526-HMH-3,7:11-cv-03370-HMH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998840902]. Mailed to: Todd Moss. [12-6255]

Appeal: 12-6255

Document: 5

Date Filed: 04/26/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6255

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TODD LAMAR MOSS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (7:05-cr-00526-HMH-3; 7:11-cv-03370-HMH)

Submitted:

April 19, 2012

Decided:

April 26, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Todd Lamar Moss, Appellant Pro Se.
Maxwell B. Cauthen, III,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-6255

Document: 5

Date Filed: 04/26/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Todd Lamar Moss seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

Supp.

2011)

as

successive

motion.

The

his

order

28

is

U.S.C.A.

not

§ 2255

appealable

(West

unless

a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2006).

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.

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

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Moss has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 12-6255

Document: 5

Date Filed: 04/26/2012

Page: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3