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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6187 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/29/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6187 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. BOBBY RAY HUNT, Defendant - Appellant.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 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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?