US v. Steven Hall

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [999273590-2]; denying Motion to compel [999188433-2] Originating case number: 1:08-cr-00015-MR-1,1:10-cv-00228-MR Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999282227]. Mailed to: Steven Hall. [13-7254]

Appeal: 13-7254

Doc: 12

Filed: 01/23/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7254

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
STEVEN JAMES HALL, a/k/a Contourimpco,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00015-MR-1; 1:10-cv-00228-MR)

Submitted:

January 21, 2014

Decided: January 23, 2014

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven James Hall, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald David Gast,
Assistant United States Attorney, David A. Thorneloe, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7254

Doc: 12

Filed: 01/23/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Steven James Hall seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.

The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a

certificate

(2012).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

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) (2012).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

Slack

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

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 Hall has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
deny

Hall’s

motion

to

compel

counsel

to

documents and his motion for adjudication.
oral

argument

because

the

facts
2

and

legal

produce

We

discovery

We dispense with
contentions

are

Appeal: 13-7254

Doc: 12

adequately

Filed: 01/23/2014

presented

in

the

Pg: 3 of 3

materials

before

this

court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3