Court Opinion

ID: 1027209
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-05 07:19:18.828034+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:26.245596
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 08-7495

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                  Plaintiff - Appellee,

             v.

ROBERT LEE PERRY,

                  Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.   N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., District Judge.   (1:05-cr-00149-NCT-2; 1:07-cv-00933-NCT-
RAE)

Submitted:    October 20, 2008             Decided:   November 17, 2008

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Lee Perry, Appellant Pro Se.       Sandra Jane Hairston,
Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

           Robert Lee Perry seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.                              The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability.                   28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000).

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)        (2000).          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    Perry       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

                                              2