US v. Sammy Frausti
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. A certificate of appealability is denied. Originating case number: 3:07-cr-00233-RJC-1, 3:16-cv-00492-RJC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency . Mailed to: Sammy Esqueda Frausti. [16-7403]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
SAMMY ESQUEDA FRAUSTI, a/k/a Sammy Esqueda Frausto,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cr-00233-RJC-1; 3:16-cv-00492-RJC)
February 17, 2017
February 28, 2017
Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sammy Esqueda Frausti, Appellant Pro Se. Steven R. Kaufman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy
Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Sammy Esqueda Frausti seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
When the district court denies
(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
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
Slack, 529 U.S.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Frausti has not made the requisite showing.
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Pg: 3 of 3
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?