Court Opinion

ID: 626598
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-04-03 19:40:12+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:51:16.353150
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 11-7722

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

DOYLE RAY MORGAN,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (1:01-cr-00052-MR-11; 1:04-cv-00258)

Submitted:   March 29, 2012                 Decided:   April 3, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Doyle Ray Morgan, Appellant Pro Se.     Jill Westmoreland Rose,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Doyle Ray Morgan seeks to appeal the district court’s

order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive

28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion, and dismissing it

on that basis.           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 Morgan has not made the requisite showing.                     Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny Morgan’s motion to

take judicial notice, and dismiss the appeal.

                                            2
            Additionally,           we     construe    Morgan’s         notice        of   appeal

and   informal      brief      as     an    application         to   file       a     second    or

successive § 2255 motion.                  United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d

200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003).                  In order to obtain authorization to

file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims

based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence, not previously

discoverable        by   due    diligence,         that    would        be     sufficient       to

establish      by    clear      and      convincing        evidence          that,      but    for

constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found

the   movant     guilty        of   the      offense;      or     (2)      a    new     rule    of

constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by

the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review.                                     28 U.S.C.A.

§ 2255(h) (West Supp. 2011).                   Morgan’s claims do not satisfy

either of these criteria.                  Therefore, we deny authorization to

file a successive § 2255 motion.

            We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal    contentions      are       adequately        presented         in     the     materials

before   the    court     and       argument       would    not      aid       the    decisional

process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                               3