US v. Frankie Elli

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:07-cr-00026-BR-1,4:12-cv-00165-BR,5:07-cr-00060-BR-1,5:12-cv-00488-BR Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999182317]. Mailed to: Frankie Cornell Ellis, Jr.. [13-6607]

Appeal: 13-6607

Doc: 10

Filed: 08/28/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6607

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRANKIE CORNELL ELLIS, JR., a/k/a Nitty,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville.
W. Earl Britt,
Senior District Judge.
(4:07-cr-00026-BR-1; 4:12-cv-00165-BR;
5:07-cr-00060-BR-1; 5:12-cv-00488-BR)

Submitted:

August 22, 2013

Decided:

August 28, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jennifer Haynes Rose, LAW OFFICE OF JENNIFER HAYNES ROSE, Cary,
North Carolina, for Appellant. John Howarth Bennett, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, North Carolina; Kimberly
Ann Moore, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-6607

Doc: 10

Filed: 08/28/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Frankie

Cornell

Ellis,

Jr.,

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

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 Ellis 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: 13-6607

Doc: 10

contentions

are

Filed: 08/28/2013

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3