Filed: Mar. 18, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7932 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERNESTO CHAVEZ-REYES, a/k/a Fernando, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-00-411; CA-03-34-1) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 18, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7932 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERNESTO CHAVEZ-REYES, a/k/a Fernando, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-00-411; CA-03-34-1) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 18, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7932
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ERNESTO CHAVEZ-REYES, a/k/a Fernando,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-00-411; CA-03-34-1)
Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 18, 2004
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ernesto Chavez-Reyes, Appellant Pro Se. Arnold L. Husser, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ernesto Chavez-Reyes seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying
relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The
order is not appealable unless 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, 336-38 (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 Chavez-Reyes 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 -