US v. Antonio Howie

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:06-cr-00050-RJC-1,3:11-cv-00290-RJC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999643191]. Mailed to: Antonio Navarro Howie. [15-6513]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6513 Doc: 5 Filed: 08/19/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6513 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. ANTONIO NAVARRO HOWIE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:06-cr-00050-RCJ-1; 3:11-cv-00290-RJC) Submitted: August 17, 2015 Decided: August 19, 2015 Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antonio Navarro Howie, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Kevin Zolot, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6513 Doc: 5 Filed: 08/19/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Antonio Navarro Howie 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 (2012). of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) A certificate of 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 Howie has not made the requisite showing. a certificate dispense with of appealability oral argument and dismiss because 2 Accordingly, we deny the the appeal. facts and We legal Appeal: 15-6513 Doc: 5 contentions Filed: 08/19/2015 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?