US v. Kelvin Spott
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to remand case [999111849-2]; denying Motion to stay proceedings and to recall the mandate in other case [999142074-2] Originating case number: 3:98-cr-00047-1,3:12-cv-00354 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999166611]. Mailed to: Kelvin Spotts. [12-7568]
Appeal: 12-7568
Doc: 23
Filed: 08/06/2013
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7568
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KELVIN ANDRE SPOTTS, a/k/a Shorty,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Huntington.
Robert C. Chambers,
Chief District Judge. (3:98-cr-00047-1; 3:12-cv-00354)
Submitted:
July 23, 2013
Decided:
August 6, 2013
Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kelvin Andre Spotts, Appellant Pro Se. John J. Frail, Assistant
United States Attorney, Steven Loew, Assistant United States
Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, Richard Gregory McVey,
Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-7568
Doc: 23
Filed: 08/06/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Kelvin
Andre
Spotts
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp.
2013)
motion.
The
order
is
not
appealable
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
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 Spotts has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We
deny the motions for remand, for stay of the proceedings, and
for recall of the mandate in No. 99-4121.
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
Appeal: 12-7568
Doc: 23
Filed: 08/06/2013
Pg: 3 of 3
presented in the materials before this 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?