Legal Appeal Dismissal
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsLegal Appeal Dismissal
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6363
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NATHAN TAYLOR,
Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling.
Frederick P. Stamp,
Jr., Senior District Judge.
(5:07-cr-00008-FPS-DJJ-1; 5:10-cv00002-FPS-DJJ)
Submitted:
July 28, 2011
Decided:
August 2, 2011
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nathan Taylor, Appellant Pro Se.
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Appellee.
Randolph John Bernard, OFFICE
Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Nathan
Taylor
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
courts
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying
relief
motion.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
judge
issues
on
his
absent
U.S.C.A.
certificate
2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).
issue
28
of
2255
(West
Supp.
appealability.
28
2011)
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.
showing
of
the
denial
28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).
of
When the
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this
standard
by
demonstrating
that
reasonable
jurists
would
find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484
Cockrell,
(2000);
(2003).
see
Miller-El
v.
537
U.S.
322,
336-38
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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.
Slack,
We have independently reviewed the record
and conclude that Taylor 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
