US v. Francisco Curbelo, No. 09-6948 (4th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6948 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANCISCO CURBELO, a/k/a Murando, Defendant - Appellant. No. 09-7361 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANCISCO CURBELO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (3:99-cr-00109-GCM-DCK-1; 3:09-cv-00150GCM) Submitted: September 29, 2009 Decided: October 8, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Francisco Curbelo, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Francisco Curbelo seeks to appeal the district court s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 2009) motion and denying his motion for bail. not appealable unless a circuit certificate of The orders are issues a A appealability will not or Supp. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). certificate of appealability. justice (West judge issue absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. standard § 2253(c)(2) by (2006). demonstrating that A prisoner reasonable satisfies jurists would this find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). conclude that Accordingly, Curbelo s We have Curbelo we motions deny to independently has not made certificates appoint counsel record, and dismiss the appeals. reviewed the of and the record requisite showing. appealability, to and supplement deny the 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

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.