United States v. Gallimore

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
United States v. Gallimore, 161 F. App'x 248 (4th Cir. 2005)

United States v. Gallimore

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6661

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TALTON YOUNG GALLIMORE, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CR-99-365-JAB; CA-04-210)

Submitted: October 21, 2005 Decided: December 30, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Talton Young Gallimore, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lawrence Patrick Auld, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Talton Young Gallimore, Jr., seeks to appeal the district

court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the

magistrate judge and dismissing his petition filed under

28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000). The order is not appealable 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

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.”

28 U.S.C. § 2253

(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336

(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 that Gallimore has not made the requisite

showing. 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

- 2 -

Reference

Status
Unpublished