US v. Michael Ecklin
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:11-cr-00139-RGD-DEM-1,2:14-cv-00389-RGD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999667781]. Mailed to: Michael Ecklin. [15-6676]
Appeal: 15-6676
Doc: 9
Filed: 09/29/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6676
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL ANGELO ECKLIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:11-cr-00139-RGD-DEM-1; 2:14-cv-00389-RGD)
Submitted:
September 17, 2015
Before SHEDD and
Circuit Judge.
WYNN,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
and
September 29, 2015
HAMILTON,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Angelo Ecklin, Appellant Pro Se.
Benjamin L. Hatch,
Randy Carl Stoker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6676
Doc: 9
Filed: 09/29/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Michael Angelo Ecklin 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
Ecklin 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: 15-6676
Doc: 9
contentions
Filed: 09/29/2015
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?