US v. Juanita Lawson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998951873-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 4:99-cr-00055-AWA-6 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998976702]. Mailed to: Lawson. [12-7039]

Appeal: 12-7039

Doc: 7

Filed: 11/07/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7039

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JUANITA E. LAWSON,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News.
Arenda Wright Allen,
District Judge. (4:99-cr-00055-AWA-6)

Submitted:

November 2, 2012

Decided:

November 7, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Juanita E. Lawson, Appellant Pro Se.
Timothy Richard Murphy,
Special
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Newport
News,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7039

Doc: 7

Filed: 11/07/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Juanita E. Lawson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

construing

successive

28

her

motion

U.S.C.A.

§ 2255

dismissing it on that basis.
a

circuit

justice

appealability.

to

or

dismiss
(West

the

Supp.

indictment
2012)

as

motion

a

and

The order is not appealable unless
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

both

on

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

ruling

must
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 Lawson has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny her motion for 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
2

Appeal: 12-7039

before

Doc: 7

the

court

Filed: 11/07/2012

and

Pg: 3 of 3

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED

3