Court Opinion

ID: 2716313
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-08-08 07:01:34.378954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:01:45.652980
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 14-6383

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

MOYA VANTION MOORE,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville.   Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (4:10-cr-00046-BO-1; 4:13-cv-00247-BO)

Submitted:   July 29, 2014                 Decided:   August 1, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Moya Vantion Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Imelda Jean Pate, OFFICE
OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Kinston, North Carolina; Jennifer E.
Wells, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Moya     Vantion      Moore    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 Moore 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