US v. Rahsean Holme

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:07-cr-00383-CCB-1,1:11-cv-02132-CCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999162954]. Mailed to: George Jarrod Hazel, Rahsean Holmes. [13-6706]

Appeal: 13-6706

Doc: 7

Filed: 07/31/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6706

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAHSEAN HOLMES, a/k/a Ox,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Catherine C. Blake, District Judge.
(1:07-cr-00383-CCB-1; 1:11-cv-02132-CCB)

Submitted:

July 19, 2013

Decided:

July 31, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rahsean Holmes, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Clayton Hanlon,
Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; George
Jarrod Hazel, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt,
Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-6706

Doc: 7

Filed: 07/31/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Rahsean Holmes seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying

relief

on

his

28

U.S.C.A.

§ 2255

(West

Supp.

2013) motion and denying his subsequent motion to alter or amend
judgment.
justice

The
or

28 U.S.C.

orders

judge

are

issues

not
a

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

appealable

certificate
(2006).

unless
of

A

a

circuit

appealability.

certificate

of

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

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

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

constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.

of

the

Slack v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S.
322, 336-38 (2003).

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

right.

denial

of

a

constitutional

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Holmes 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: 13-6706

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 07/31/2013

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3