Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06210/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06210-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Calvin Bernard Green
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6210

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff – Appellee, 

v.

CALVIN BERNARD GREEN, a/k/a Aaron O. Smith, Jr., a/k/a 

Calvin M. Green, a/k/a Calvin D. Smith, a/k/a Calvin Marvin 

Smith, a/k/a Calvin Darnell Green, a/k/a Budda Smith, a/k/a 

Calvin Darnell Smith, a/k/a William Mingo Johnson,

Defendant – Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior 

District Judge. (7:99-cr-00032-jct-1; 7:09-cv-80166-jct-mfu)

Submitted: April 22, 2010 Decided: May 10, 2010

Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Calvin Bernard Green, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph W. H. Mott, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-6210 Doc: 7 Filed: 05/10/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

Calvin Bernard Green seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter 

or amend the court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 

(West Supp. 2009) motion. The orders are not appealable unless 

a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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). 

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, 484-85

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We 

have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Green

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 materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 10-6210 Doc: 7 Filed: 05/10/2010 Pg: 2 of 2