United States v. Moise

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7884 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MARJORIE MOISE, a/k/a Jane Doe, a/k/a Katrina Yates, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-95-194, CA-01-2896-9-8) Submitted: April 30, 2003 Decided: July 18, 2003 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marjorie Moise, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marjorie Moise appeals from the order of the district court denying relief on her motion to vacate, set aside, or correct her sentence, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). In reviewing the denial of a § 2255 motion, this court may only grant a certificate of appealability if the appellant makes a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). The relevant inquiry is whether “‘reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.’” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). Assuming without deciding that equitable tolling applies, we conclude that Moise has failed to make this showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Moise’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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