From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Esquivel

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 23, 2010
384 F. App'x 242 (4th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-7684.

Submitted: June 17, 2010.

Decided: June 23, 2010.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:05-cr-00026-F-1; 5:08-cv-00281-F).

Frank Esquivel, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Kimberly Ann Moore, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Frank Esquivel seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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 a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Esquivel has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Esquivel

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 23, 2010
384 F. App'x 242 (4th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

U.S. v. Esquivel

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank ESQUIVEL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jun 23, 2010

Citations

384 F. App'x 242 (4th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Esquivel v. U.S.

The Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal, finding that Esquivel failed to demonstrate entitlement to a…