US v. Frederick Brook
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 6:08-cr-00121-HMH-1,6:12-cv-02235-HMH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999076722]. Mailed to: Frederick Smith Brooks. [12-7747]
Appeal: 12-7747
Doc: 7
Filed: 04/01/2013
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7747
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FREDERICK SMITH BROOKS, a/k/a Spoon,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (6:08-cr-00121-HMH-1; 6:12-cv-02235-HMH)
Submitted:
March 28, 2013
Decided:
April 1, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frederick Smith Brooks, Appellant Pro Se.
Elizabeth Jean
Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-7747
Doc: 7
Filed: 04/01/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Frederick Smith Brooks seeks to appeal the district
court’s
order
dismissing
(West Supp. 2012) motion.
as
untimely
his
28
U.S.C.A.
§
2255
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
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 Brooks has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
We
legal
Appeal: 12-7747
Doc: 7
contentions
Filed: 04/01/2013
are
adequately
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?