US v. Charlotte Johnson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 4:11-cr-00109-RBS-FBS-1,4:13-cv-00111-RBS. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999345769]. Mailed to: C. Johnson. [13-7926]

Appeal: 13-7926

Doc: 8

Filed: 04/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7926

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CHARLOTTE JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News.
Rebecca Beach Smith,
Chief District Judge.
(4:11-cr-00109-RBS-FBS-1; 4:13-cv-00111RBS)

Submitted:

April 17, 2014

Decided:

April 29, 2014

Before KEENAN, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charlotte Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Matthew Hurt,
Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7926

Doc: 8

Filed: 04/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Charlotte Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.

The order

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

of

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B).

appealability

will

not

issue

absent

A
“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
on

the

merits,

demonstrating
district

that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies relief

prisoner

satisfies

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

Slack

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 Johnson 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: 13-7926

Doc: 8

contentions

Filed: 04/29/2014

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3