Court Opinion

ID: 2924471
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 19:00:54.399622+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:22:11.584042
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 15-6619

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

CHRISTOPHER KEON GREEN,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.    James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00013-D-1; 5:14-cv-00389-D)

Submitted:   September 9, 2015           Decided:   September 11, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Keon Green, Appellant Pro Se. Shailika S. Kotiya,
Kimberly Ann Moore, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Christopher Keon Green seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion

and denying his motion for reconsideration.                          The orders are 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

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

                                               2
contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                               DISMISSED

                                   3