Filed: Apr. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2019
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAAD SUBHI BASHA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:16-cr-00059-FDW-1; 3:18-cv- 00281-FDW) Submitted: April 18, 2019 Decided: April 23, 2019 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAAD SUBHI BASHA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:16-cr-00059-FDW-1; 3:18-cv- 00281-FDW) Submitted: April 18, 2019 Decided: April 23, 2019 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6235
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SAAD SUBHI BASHA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina,
at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:16-cr-00059-FDW-1; 3:18-cv-
00281-FDW)
Submitted: April 18, 2019 Decided: April 23, 2019
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Saad Subhi Basha, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Saad Subhi Basha seeks to appeal the district court’s order 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 Basha 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 this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2