US v. Robert Patterson, No. 09-8082 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-8082 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT EDWARD PATTERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:04-cr-00049-BO-1; 5:07-cv-00385-BO) Submitted: July 14, 2010 Decided: July 22, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Edward Patterson, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Steve R. Matheney, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert Edward Patterson seeks to appeal the district court s orders denying him relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion and treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion as a successive § 2255 motion, and denying it on that basis. or The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 debatable court s or assessment wrong. Slack of the constitutional v. McDaniel, 529 claims is 473, 484 U.S. (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 the 484-85. conclude that Accordingly, We have independently Patterson we deny a has not made certificate 2 reviewed the of record requisite and showing. appealability, deny Patterson s motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.
