Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-08060/USCOURTS-ca4-09-08060-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Abdullah Rasool Shakoor
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8060

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ABDULLAH RASOOL SHAKOOR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, 

District Judge. (7:97-cr-00064-BO-1; 7:07-cv-00069-BO)

Submitted: February 8, 2010 Decided: February 25, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abdullah Rasool Shakoor, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-8060 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/25/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Abdullah Rasool Shakoor seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for 

reconsideration of the court’s order denying relief on his 28 

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion and denying his motion 

to recuse. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th 

Cir. 2004). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the 

district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive 

procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. 

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. 

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 

683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the 

record and conclude that Shakoor 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

Appeal: 09-8060 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/25/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 09-8060 Doc: 9 Filed: 02/25/2010 Pg: 3 of 3