US v. Willie Mitchell

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 1:04-cr-00029-JFM-1,1:13-cv-00110-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999324143]. Mailed to: WIllie Mitchell. [13-7507]

Appeal: 13-7507

Doc: 11

Filed: 03/27/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7507

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIE MITCHELL, a/k/a Bo,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:04-cr-00029-JFM-1; 1:13-cv-00110-JFM)

Submitted:

March 25, 2014

Decided:

March 27, 2014

Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Clayton Hanlon,
Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7507

Doc: 11

Filed: 03/27/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Willie Mitchell seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and a
subsequent order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to
alter or amend judgment.

The orders are not appealable unless a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012).

A

certificate

of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2012).

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 Mitchell has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We

dispense

with

oral

argument

2

because

the

facts

and

legal

Appeal: 13-7507

Doc: 11

contentions

are

Filed: 03/27/2014

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3