US v. Trevor Reed

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:11-cr-00353-M-1,5:14-cv-00502-M Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999653515]. Mailed to: Reed. [14-7891, 15-6240]

Appeal: 14-7891

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/03/2015

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7891

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TREVOR REED,
Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-6240

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TREVOR REED,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
J. Frederick Motz,
Senior District Judge. (5:11-cr-00353-M-1; 5:14-cv-00502-M)

Submitted:

August 21, 2015

Decided:

September 3, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Appeal: 14-7891

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/03/2015

Pg: 2 of 4

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Trevor Reed, Appellant Pro Se.
Evan Rikhye, Assistant United
States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 14-7891

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/03/2015

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated cases, Trevor Reed seeks to appeal
the

district

§ 2255

court’s

(2012)

order

motion

district court’s

as

order

dismissing

successive

denying

his

second

(No.

Reed’s

28

14-7891)

Fed.

R.

U.S.C.

and

Civ.

P.

the
60(b)

motion to set aside the order denying his first 28 U.S.C. § 2255
motion (No. 15-6240).

These 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

both

on

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

ruling

must
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
Reed has not made the requisite showing.
certificate

of

appealability

and
3

Accordingly, we deny a

dismiss

the

appeals.

We

Appeal: 14-7891

Doc: 10

dispense

with

contentions

are

Filed: 09/03/2015

oral

argument

adequately

Pg: 4 of 4

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

4