Filed: Jun. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6240 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANK JUNIOR DEGRAFFENREID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cr-00147-TDS-1; 1:15- cv-00628-TDS-JEP) Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018 Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6240 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANK JUNIOR DEGRAFFENREID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cr-00147-TDS-1; 1:15- cv-00628-TDS-JEP) Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018 Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6240
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRANK JUNIOR DEGRAFFENREID,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cr-00147-TDS-1; 1:15-
cv-00628-TDS-JEP)
Submitted: June 14, 2018 Decided: June 19, 2018
Before TRAXLER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frank Junior Degraffenreid, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Frank Junior Degraffenreid seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). 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 Degraffenreid has
not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Degraffenreid’s motion for 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
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2