Filed: Sep. 22, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6780 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YVONNE BORDERS BENNETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-01-10-V; CA-03-52-5) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 22, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Y
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6780 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YVONNE BORDERS BENNETT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-01-10-V; CA-03-52-5) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 22, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yv..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6780
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
YVONNE BORDERS BENNETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CR-01-10-V; CA-03-52-5)
Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 22, 2004
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Yvonne Borders Bennett, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Yvonne Borders Bennett, a federal prisoner, seeks to
appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her 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 (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 Bennett 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 -