US v. John C. Curtiss


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:88-cr-00053-REP-RCY,3:12-cv-00752-REP-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999785683]. Mailed to: Curtiss. [15-7508]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-7508 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/31/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7508 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN C. CURTISS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:88-cr-00053-REP-RCY; 3:12-cv-00752-REP-RCY) Submitted: March 29, 2016 Decided: March 31, 2016 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John C. Curtiss, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Jessica D. Aber, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-7508 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/31/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: John C. Curtiss seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely 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 Curtiss has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. dispense with oral argument because 2 the facts and We legal Appeal: 15-7508 Doc: 13 contentions are Filed: 03/31/2016 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?