Court Opinion

ID: 2716327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-08-08 07:01:43.179572+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:01:47.701888
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 14-6598

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

ROBERTO PABLO GUTIERREZ,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (5:11-cr-00149-BR-1; 5:13-cv-00115-BR)

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

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roberto Pablo Gutierrez, Appellant Pro Se.    Jennifer P. May-
Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Shawn Robert Evans,
Michael Gordon James, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina; William Glenn Perry,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Roberto Pablo Gutierrez seeks to appeal the district

court’s    order     accepting     the     recommendation        of    the    magistrate

judge and 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 Gutierrez 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