From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Johnson

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 21, 2010
384 F. App'x 218 (4th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-8188.

Submitted: June 4, 2010.

Decided: June 21, 2010.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (3:04-cr-00040-REM-JES-l; 3:07-cv-00132-REM-JES).

Rozell Alonza Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Rozell Alonza Johnson seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting in part and rejecting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 Johnson 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. Johnson

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 21, 2010
384 F. App'x 218 (4th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

U.S. v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rozell Alonza JOHNSON…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jun 21, 2010

Citations

384 F. App'x 218 (4th Cir. 2010)