US v. Kenneth Monroe

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to expedite decision [999859063-2] Originating case number: 5:07-cr-00093-BR-1,5:16-cv-00184-BR Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999902411]. Mailed to: Kenneth Monroe. [16-6737]

Appeal: 16-6737

Doc: 7

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENNETH WAYNE MONROE,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (5:07-cr-00093-BR-1; 5:16-cv-00184-BR)

Submitted:

July 28, 2016

Before MOTZ and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

August 2, 2016

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Wayne Monroe, Appellant Pro Se.
Jason Harris Cowley,
Assistant United States Attorney, James J. Kurosad, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6737

Doc: 7

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Wayne Monroe seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

motion.
judge

as

successive

28

U.S.C.

§ 2255

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue

his

absent

“a

of

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

appealability.

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

of

a

When the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this

standard

by

demonstrating

that

reasonable

jurists

would

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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 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
Monroe has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Monroe’s

motion

to

expedite

decision

and

dispense

We deny

with

oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

2

Appeal: 16-6737

Doc: 7

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3