US v. Jose Perez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:93-cr-00026-F-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999266060]. Mailed to: Jose Perez. [13-7395]

Appeal: 13-7395

Doc: 7

Filed: 12/24/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7395

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JOSE ANGEL PEREZ, a/k/a Angel,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (7:93-cr-00026-F-1)

Submitted:

December 19, 2013

Decided:

December 24, 2013

Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jose Angel Perez, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7395

Doc: 7

Filed: 12/24/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jose Angel Perez seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider its
order treating his previous Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a
successive

28

U.S.C.A.

§ 2255

dismissing it on that basis.
a

circuit

justice

appealability.

or

(West

Supp.

2013)

motion,

and

The order is not appealable unless
judge

issues

a

certificate

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

of

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 Perez 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: 13-7395

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 12/24/2013

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3