Court Opinion

ID: 180281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-12-02 19:50:57+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:51.301893
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 10-7145

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                  Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

DANI GUERRA-MORALES,

                  Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.    James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (3:08-cr-00253-JRS-1)

Submitted:     November 18, 2010             Decided:   December 2, 2010

Before SHEDD and      AGEE,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dani Guerra-Morales, Appellant Pro Se. Sara Elizabeth Chase,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Dani    Guerra-Morales        seeks       to    appeal   the    district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp.    2010)    motion.        The   order   is     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) (2006).             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    Guerra-Morales       has    not    made   the   requisite

showing.     Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability,

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

We    dispense    with    oral   argument      because      the   facts    and   legal

                                          2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                           DISMISSED

                                3