United States v. Hazel

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: March 14, 2003
• Docket: 02-7945
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7945

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM HAZEL, a/k/a Beanie,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-92-163-N, CA-01-467-2)

Submitted: March 6, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Hazel, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

William Hazel seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hazel

has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, U.S. , 2003

WL 431659, at *10 (U.S. Feb. 25, 2003) (No. 01-7662). Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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