US v. Fernando Nunez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:08-cr-00262-D-1,5:11-cv-00193-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999404786]. Mailed to: Fernando Nunez. [14-6763]

Appeal: 14-6763

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6763

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FERNANDO MIGUEL NUNEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:08-cr-00262-D-1; 5:11-cv-00193-D)

Submitted:

July 24, 2014

Before FLOYD and
Circuit Judge.

THACKER,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

July 29, 2014

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Fernando Miguel Nunez, Appellant Pro Se.
Ethan A. Ontjes,
Assistant United States Attorney, Shailika K. Shah, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6763

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Fernando
court’s

order

Miguel

denying

Nunez

relief

seeks

on

to

his

28

appeal
U.S.C.

the

district

§ 2255

(2012)

motion, and its subsequent order denying reconsideration.
orders are
issues

not

a

appealable

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

unless
of

circuit

justice

appealability.

or

28

judge
U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

a

The

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

of

a

When the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this

standard

by

demonstrating

that

reasonable

jurists

would

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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 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 Nunez 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: 14-6763

Doc: 8

contentions

Filed: 07/29/2014

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3