Court Opinion

ID: 856854
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-04-01 19:06:50.377313+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:32:02.066964
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 12-7889

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

JONATHAN ENRIQUE ACOSTA-CORRALCO,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.    Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (6:10-cr-00411-HMH-2; 6:12-cv-02422-HMH)

Submitted:   March 28, 2013                 Decided:   April 1, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Enrique Acosta-Corralco, Appellant Pro Se.       Andrew
Burke Moorman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Jonathan Enrique Acosta-Corralco seeks to appeal the

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

(West Supp. 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)            (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     Acosta-Corralco       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

                                            2
before   this   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                    DISMISSED

                                     3