Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-13-06199/USCOURTS-ca4-13-06199-0/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UNPUBLISHED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. 13-6199

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

PABLO EMILIO RODRIGUEZ, III,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

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

Senior District Judge. (5:02-cr-00160-H-1; 5:12-cv-00302-H)

Submitted: December 22, 2014 Decided: January 8, 2015

Before WILKINSON, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Pablo Emilio Rodriguez, III, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. MayParker, Ethan A. Ontjes, Assistant United States Attorneys, 

Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-6199 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/08/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Pablo Emilio Rodriguez, III seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

See 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 Rodriguez 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: 13-6199 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/08/2015 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: 13-6199 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/08/2015 Pg: 3 of 3