US v. Charles Pyne


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 8:04-cr-00018-DKC-3 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999716692]. Mailed to: Charles Pyne. [15-6061]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6061 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/11/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6061 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHARLES PYNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:04-cr-00018-DKC-3) Submitted: August 10, 2015 Decided: December 11, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Pyne, Appellant Assistant United States Appellee. Pro Se. Attorney, Barbara Suzanne Skalla, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6061 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/11/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Charles Pyne seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his July 23, 2014 motion for reconsideration of the court’s August 30, 2007 order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and March 27, 2014 order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d)(3) motion. a circuit justice appealability. or The order is not appealable unless judge issues a certificate 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). of 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 must 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 Pyne has not made the requisite showing. certificate of We dispense with appealability oral argument 2 and because Accordingly, we deny a dismiss the the facts appeal. and legal Appeal: 15-6061 Doc: 8 contentions Filed: 12/11/2015 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?