Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

56 F. App'x 153

United States v. Smith

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided February 20, 2003

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2003-02-20

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Rose v. Lee · Barajas-Aguilar v. United States

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2003-02-20

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Alex Lamont Smith, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting in part and rejecting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Smith’s 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 a district court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Smith has not made the requisite showing. See United States v. Smith, Nos. CR-96-14, CA-99-49 (N.D.W.Va. Aug. 13, 2002). 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.

¶2 DISMISSED.

/56/fappx/153 · .json · Public domain