US v. David Lewi


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999916794-2] Originating case number: 5:11-cr-00229-F-8,5:14-cv-00374-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000097262]. Mailed to: David Lewis. [16-7133]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7133 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/08/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7133 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID LEWIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:11-cr-00229-F-8; 5:14-cv-00374-F) Submitted: December 16, 2016 Decided: June 8, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Shailika S. Kotiya, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7133 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/08/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: David Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. order 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 Lewis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Lewis’ motion to appoint counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 2 Appeal: 16-7133 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/08/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 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?