US v. Bobby Hunt
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to remand case for limited purpose [999787327-2] Originating case number: 7:09-cr-00034-FL-1,7:12-cv-00230-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999873487]. Mailed to: Bobby Hunt. [16-6187]
Appeal: 16-6187
Doc: 7
Filed: 06/29/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6187
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
BOBBY RAY HUNT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (7:09-cr-00034-FL-1; 7:12-cv-00230-FL)
Submitted:
June 16, 2016
Decided:
June 29, 2016
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bobby Ray Hunt, Appellant Pro Se.
Rudy E. Renfer, Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6187
Doc: 7
Filed: 06/29/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Bobby Ray Hunt 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
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
When the district court denies
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
Slack
satisfies
jurists
this
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
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
Hunt has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We also
deny Hunt’s motion for a limited remand based on the district
court’s indication that it is likely to grant Hunt’s Fed. R.
Civ. P. 60(b) motion challenging the order denying relief on his
2
Appeal: 16-6187
Doc: 7
§ 2255 motion.
Filed: 06/29/2016
Pg: 3 of 3
As that motion seeks to raise a new habeas
claim, it is an unauthorized successive § 2255 motion and the
district
court
is
without
jurisdiction
to
consider
Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 530-32 (2005).
it.
See
We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately
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?