Filed: May 29, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RYAN DANIEL GRAVES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-00-626, CA-02-1685-3-20) Submitted: May 20, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tara Dawn Shurling
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RYAN DANIEL GRAVES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-00-626, CA-02-1685-3-20) Submitted: May 20, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tara Dawn Shurling,..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6235
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RYAN DANIEL GRAVES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-00-626, CA-02-1685-3-20)
Submitted: May 20, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tara Dawn Shurling, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Stacey
Denise Haynes, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ryan Daniel Graves seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000),
and denying his motion to reconsider pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 59(e). We have independently reviewed the record
and conclude that Graves has not made a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,
123
S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)
(2000). 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