US v. Anthony Brown
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:05-cr-00009-RLV-DCK-18,5:13-cv-00023-RLV Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999181143]. Mailed to: Brown. [13-6711]
Appeal: 13-6711
Doc: 5
Filed: 08/27/2013
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6711
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY MICHAEL BROWN, a/k/a Solo,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge.
(5:05-cr-00009-RLV-DCK-18; 5:13-cv00023-RLV)
Submitted:
August 22, 2013
Decided:
August 27, 2013
Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Michael Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
Thomas A. O’Malley,
Maria Kathleen Vento, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United
States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-6711
Doc: 5
Filed: 08/27/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Anthony
court’s
order
Michael
dismissing
Brown
his
seeks
28
to
appeal
U.S.C.A.
§
the
2255
district
(West
Supp.
2013) motion as successive and unauthorized.
The order is not
appealable
judge
unless
a
circuit
certificate of appealability.
A
certificate
of
justice
or
issues
a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).
appealability
will
not
issue
absent
“a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).
relief
on
the
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
When the district court denies
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
satisfies
jurists
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
Slack
this
standard
find
U.S.
that
the
claims
constitutional
529
by
is
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
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
a
debatable
Slack, 529 U.S.
at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Brown 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: 13-6711
Doc: 5
contentions
Filed: 08/27/2013
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?