United States v. Goodine

332 F. App'x 884

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6998

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DONALD RAY GOODINE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas David Schroeder, District Judge. (1:03-cr-00472-TDS-1; 1:07-cv-00469- TDS-WWD)

Submitted: September 16, 2009 Decided: September 22, 2009

Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald Ray Goodine, Appellant Pro Se. Frank Joseph Chut, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Donald Ray Goodine seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp. 2009) 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). A

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S.

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Goodine 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