From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. McQueen

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 19, 2016
630 F. App'x 205 (4th Cir. 2016)

Opinion

No. 15-7105

01-19-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANTHONY MCQUEEN, Defendant - Appellant.

Anthony McQueen, Appellant Pro Se. Angelissa Domenica Savino, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:04-cr-00257-CMH-1; 1:07-cv-00871-CMH) Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony McQueen, Appellant Pro Se. Angelissa Domenica Savino, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Anthony McQueen seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration of the denial of his Fed R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion denying reconsideration of the district court's order dismissing McQueen's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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 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 (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 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 McQueen 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED


Summaries of

United States v. McQueen

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jan 19, 2016
630 F. App'x 205 (4th Cir. 2016)
Case details for

United States v. McQueen

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANTHONY MCQUEEN…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jan 19, 2016

Citations

630 F. App'x 205 (4th Cir. 2016)