US v. Timothy Murphy

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case numbers: 5:04-cr-00241-FL-1,5:12-cv-00287-FL.Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999285509]. Mailed to: Timothy Murphy. [13-7848]

Appeal: 13-7848

Doc: 7

Filed: 01/28/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7848

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TIMOTHY LAFON MURPHY, a/k/a TJ,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:04-cr-00241-FL-1; 5:12-cv-00287-FL)

Submitted:

January 23, 2014

Decided:

January 28, 2014

Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Lafon Murphy, Appellant Pro Se.
Jason Harris Cowley,
Edward D. Gray, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorneys, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7848

Doc: 7

Filed: 01/28/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Timothy
court’s

order

Lafon

Murphy

accepting

the

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

of

the
the

district

magistrate

judge and dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012)
motion, and denying his motion to reopen final judgment filed
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6).

The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

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 Murphy has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
2

We

Appeal: 13-7848

Doc: 7

dispense

Filed: 01/28/2014

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3