US v. Bruce Davidson, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 2:09-cr-00014-JPB-DJJ-2,2:12-cv-00021-JPB-DJJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999038598].. [12-7609]

Appeal: 12-7609

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/07/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7609

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BRUCE ALAN DAVIDSON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge.
(2:09-cr-00014-JPB-DJJ-2; 2:12-cv-00021JPB-DJJ)

Submitted:

January 24, 2013

Decided:

February 7, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bruce Alan Davidson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Stephen Donald
Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7609

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/07/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Bruce Alan Davidson, Jr., seeks to appeal the district
court’s

order

accepting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2012) motion.
justice

or

The order is not appealable unless a circuit

judge

issues

a

certificate

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

of

appealability.

28

A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.”

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

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 Davidson has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We

dispense

with

oral

argument

2

because

the

facts

and

legal

Appeal: 12-7609

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 02/07/2013

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3