US v. Benjamin Sanjurjo

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:98-cr-00338-REP-RCY,3:12-cv-00841-REP-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999771508]. Mailed to: Benjamin Sanjurjo. [15-7654]

Appeal: 15-7654

Doc: 5

Filed: 03/10/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7654

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BENJAMIN SANJURJO, a/k/a Mickey,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:98-cr-00338-REP-RCY)

Submitted:

March 8, 2016

Decided:

March 10, 2016

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Benjamin Sanjurjo, Appellant Pro Se.
Benjamin L. Hatch,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia; Stephen
Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7654

Doc: 5

Filed: 03/10/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Benjamin

Sanjurjo

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
Sanjurjo has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2