US v. Curtis Arnold


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999618600-2], updating certificate of appealability status. Originating case number: 3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2,3:10-cv-00453-RJC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999646796]. Mailed to: Curtis Arnold FCI FORT DIX FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 2000 Joint Base MDL, NJ 08640-0000. [15-6850]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6850 Doc: 14 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6850 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CURTIS ARNOLD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:05-cr-00046-RJC-DSC-2; 3:10-cv-00453RJC) Submitted: August 20, 2015 Decided: August 25, 2015 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curtis Arnold, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas A. O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6850 Doc: 14 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Curtis Arnold 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 merits, demonstrating district 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 Arnold has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Arnold’s motion for transcripts at Government expense, deny a certificate dispense of with appealability, and oral because argument 2 dismiss the the appeal. facts and We legal Appeal: 15-6850 Doc: 14 contentions are Filed: 08/25/2015 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?