US v. Keith Frazier

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:11-cr-00113-F-1,4:15-cv-00084-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999919698]. Mailed to: Keith Frazier. [16-6548]

Appeal: 16-6548

Doc: 9

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6548

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KEITH EDWARD FRAZIER,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (4:11-cr-00113-F-1; 4:15-cv-00084-F)

Submitted:

August 25, 2016

Decided:

August 30, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith Edward Frazier, Appellant Pro Se.
John Howarth Bennett,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, North
Carolina; Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6548

Doc: 9

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Keith Edward Frazier seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and
his motion for reconsideration.
unless

a

circuit

appealability.

justice

or

The orders are not appealable
judge

issues

a

certificate

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

of

A certificate

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

ruling

is

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
denial of a constitutional right.

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Frazier 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: 16-6548

Doc: 9

contentions

Filed: 08/30/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3