Court Opinion

ID: 4147499
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-02-22 20:01:04.279303+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:53:52.712298
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 16-7697

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

GARY FURBUSH,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (4:05-cr-00037-RBS-FBS-6; 4:16-cv-00163-RBS)

Submitted:   February 16, 2017            Decided:   February 22, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Furbush, Appellant Pro Se.     Eric Matthew Hurt, Assistant
United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Gary Furbush 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

Furbush 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   this   court   and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                 DISMISSED

                                      2