US v. Yahya Watson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 1:07-cr-00396-CMH-1,1:10-cv-01391-CMH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998949172]. Mailed to: Yahya Watson. [12-6325]
Appeal: 12-6325
Doc: 10
Filed: 10/01/2012
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6325
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
YAHYA WATSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:07-cr-00396-CMH-1; 1:10-cv-01391-CMH)
Submitted:
September 27, 2012
Decided:
October 1, 2012
Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Yahya Watson, Appellant Pro Se.
Jonathan Leo Fahey, Karen
Ledbetter Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys, Stephen
Andrew Sola, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Mazen
Mohammed Basrawi, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-6325
Doc: 10
Filed: 10/01/2012
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Yahya
Watson
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012)
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.
Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Watson 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: 12-6325
Doc: 10
Filed: 10/01/2012
Pg: 3 of 3
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?