Court Opinion

ID: 4153708
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-03-17 19:01:06.584875+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:35.852617
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 16-7695

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                      Plaintiff – Appellee,

          v.

MONICA RENTERIA-GONZALEZ,

                      Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.   David A. Faber,
Senior District Judge. (7:12-cr-00037-FA-11)

Submitted:   March 14, 2017                 Decided:     March 17, 2017

Before FLOYD and    HARRIS,    Circuit   Judges,   and   DAVIS,   Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Monica Renteria-Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se. Kristine L. Fritz,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Jennifer P. May-Parker,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Monica    Renteria-Gonzalez         seeks       to     appeal       the     district

court’s    order     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

Renteria-Gonzalez           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

                                           2
before   this   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                    DISMISSED

                                     3