UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7750
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KENNETH ROSHAUN REID,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Julian Abele Cook, Jr., District
Judge. (0:04-cr-00353-CMC-1; 0:09-cv-70126-CMC)
Submitted: March 15, 2011 Decided: March 21, 2011
Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth Roshaun Reid, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Mikell Johnson,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Roshaun Reid seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(West Supp. 2010) motion and his motion for a certificate of
appealability. * These orders are not appealable unless a circuit
justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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). 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 Reid has not made the requisite showing.
*
We construe Reid’s motion for a certificate of
appealability, which was filed within the time limit allotted
for filing a notice of appeal from the district court’s order
denying Reid’s § 2255 motion, as a timely notice of appeal.
2
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
3