Filed: Feb. 23, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7771 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DRAKO OLANDIS SULLIVAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-898; CA-03-2200-6) Submitted: February 12, 2004 Decided: February 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Drako O
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7771 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DRAKO OLANDIS SULLIVAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-898; CA-03-2200-6) Submitted: February 12, 2004 Decided: February 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Drako Ol..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7771
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DRAKO OLANDIS SULLIVAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-01-898; CA-03-2200-6)
Submitted: February 12, 2004 Decided: February 23, 2004
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Drako Olandis Sullivan, Appellant Pro Se. Isaac Louis Johnson,
Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Draco Olandis Sullivan seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2000). The order is appealable only if a circuit justice
or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §
2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this
standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that
his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive
procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);
Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,
252 F.3d
676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Sullivan 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 before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 2 -