Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06822/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06822-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6822

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

CEDRIC MONTE LITTLE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, 

Senior District Judge. (4:05-cr-00050-H-1; 4:12-cv-00182-H)

Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cedric Monte Little, Appellant Pro Se. John Howarth Bennett, 

Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Greenville, North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6822 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/19/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Cedric Monte Little seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders denying relief on his motions seeking relief from the 

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and 

reconsideration. The orders is not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Little 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 

Appeal: 15-6822 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/19/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-6822 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/19/2015 Pg: 3 of 3