US v. Eric Smith
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:08-cr-00147-AWA-FBS-14,4:12-cv-00136-AWA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999517885]. Mailed to: Eric Smith. [14-7312]
Appeal: 14-7312
Doc: 9
Filed: 01/27/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7312
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ERIC SMITH, a/k/a Capone, a/k/a Pone,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (4:08-cr-00147-AWA-FBS-14; 4:12-cv-00136-AWA)
Submitted:
January 22, 2015
Decided:
January 27, 2015
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Eric Matthew Hurt, Howard Jacob
Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorneys, Newport News,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-7312
Doc: 9
Filed: 01/27/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Eric Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
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.
satisfies
jurists
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
Slack
this
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 Smith 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: 14-7312
Doc: 9
contentions
Filed: 01/27/2015
are
adequately
Pg: 3 of 3
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?