US v. Ortiz (4th Cir. 2004)
Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (February 10, 2004)
Docket number: 02-7629
Permanent Link:
http://vlex.com/vid/18199078
Id. vLex: VLEX-18199078
Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)
Search in this document
Document options
U.S. Supreme Court - Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellee. John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellee, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellant., 252 F.3d 676 (4th Cir. 2001) Petitioner-Appellant, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellee. John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellee, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellant.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUITNo. 02-7629 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versusGABRIELLE ANTHONY ORTIZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, DistrictJudge. (CR-01-42-A; CA-02-1039-AM)Submitted: October 15, 2003 Decided: February 10, 2004 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.James Harold Feldman, Jr., LAW OFFICES OF ALAN ELLIS, Ardmore,Pennsylvania, for Appellant. William Edward Fitzpatrick, OFFICE OFTHE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Gabrielle Anthony Ortiz seeks to appeal the district court§ 2255 (2000) motion. Ortiz cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issuesa certificate of appealability, and a certificate of appealabilitywill not issue absent a § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A § 2255movant meets this standard by demonstrating that reasonable juristswould find that his constitutional claims are debatable and thatany dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are alsodebatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,, 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039-40 (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 Ortiz has notmade the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate ofappealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oralargument because the facts and legal contentions are adequatelypresented in the materials before the court and argument would notaid the decisional process. DISMISSED