Smith v. United States

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS F | L E D

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT APR 24 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-15881 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:21-cv-00248-HDM 3:15-cr-00061-HDM-WGC-2 V. District of Nevada, Reno EDWARD SMITH, AKA Smitty, ORDER Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SILVERMAN and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges. This appeal is from the denial of appellant’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and subsequent Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion. The request for a certificate of appealability (Docket Entry Nos. 6 & 13) is denied because appellant has not shown that “jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the [§ 2255 motion] states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct 1n its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also 28 USS.C. § 2253(c)(2); Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003); United States v. Winkles, 795 F.3d 1134, 1143 (9th Cir. 2015). Any pending motions are denied as moot. DENIED.