UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7668
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT ANDRE LEGETTE, a/k/a Base, a/k/a Andre Legette,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(4:09-cr-01370-TLW-1)
Submitted: January 22, 2013 Decided: January 25, 2013
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Robert Andre Legette, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker
Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Andre Legette seeks to appeal the district
court’s orders (1) denying his motion for reduction of sentence
under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and denying relief on his 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion; and (2) denying his
motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the district
court’s denial of Legette’s § 3582(c)(2) motion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
orders in part for the reasons stated by the district court.
United States v. Legette, No. 4:09-cr-01370-TLW-1 (D.S.C. Aug.
22, 2012 & Sept. 18, 2012).
The district court’s orders denying relief on
Legette’s § 2255 motion and denying reconsideration are not
appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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) (2006). 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
2
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 Legette has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in
part. 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART;
DISMISSED IN PART
3