Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-08003/USCOURTS-ca4-15-08003-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Moises Frias-Guevara
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8003

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MOISES FRIAS-GUEVARA,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:11-cr-00324-WO-1; 1:14-cv-00175-

WO-LPA)

Submitted: June 13, 2016 Decided: June 17, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Moises Frias-Guevara, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, 

Robert Michael Hamilton, Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United 

States Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-8003 Doc: 9 Filed: 06/17/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Moises Frias-Guevara seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order 

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 

Frias-Guevara 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 

Appeal: 15-8003 Doc: 9 Filed: 06/17/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-8003 Doc: 9 Filed: 06/17/2016 Pg: 3 of 3