Filed: Mar. 03, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7565 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDNA GOOCH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-02-641; CA-03-1233) Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 3, 2006 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edna Gooch, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7565 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EDNA GOOCH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-02-641; CA-03-1233) Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 3, 2006 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edna Gooch, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7565
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
EDNA GOOCH,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CR-02-641; CA-03-1233)
Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 3, 2006
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edna Gooch, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Edna Gooch seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on her 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 for claims addressed by the district
court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of
a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gooch has not
made the requisite showing. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S.
322, 336 (2003). 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 -