Filed: Sep. 23, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6961 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ANDREW JON TACAWY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 01-285-PJM; CA-03-2338-PJM) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Jon Tacaw
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6961 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ANDREW JON TACAWY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 01-285-PJM; CA-03-2338-PJM) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Jon Tacawy..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6961
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANDREW JON TACAWY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR-
01-285-PJM; CA-03-2338-PJM)
Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andrew Jon Tacawy, Appellant Pro Se. Deborah A. Johnston, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Andrew Jon Tacawy seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a
§ 2255 proceeding 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 (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 Tacawy 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 -