Case ID: f-appx_155/html/0698-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Keith Alan WATSON, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-7178.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 9, 2005.
    Decided: Nov. 30, 2005.
    
      Keith Alan Watson, Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, Office of the United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, Robert Joseph Seidel, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Keith Alan Watson seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction Watson’s motion filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), but characterized by the district court as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. This court previously has reviewed the district court’s dismissal of this order in its review of Watson’s appeal from the district court’s dismissal of the underlying § 2555 motion. See United States v. Watson, 149 Fed.Appx. 134 (4th Cir.2005) (unpublished). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability because Watson has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, and we dismiss this appeal as duplicative. 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