United States v. Norton

102 F. App'x 816

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6933

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RICHARD CHARLES NORTON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Chief District Judge. (CR-99-78; CA-02-1012-7)

Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 23, 2004

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Charles Norton, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Richard Charles Norton seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Norton 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

- 2 -