US v. Paul Mitchell, Jr., No. 13-6636 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6636 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PAUL BERNARD MITCHELL, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:09-cr-00382-H-1; 5:12-cv-00471-H) Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 30, 2013 Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul Bernard Mitchell, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. MayParker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Paul Bernard Mitchell, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion. unless a circuit appealability. justice or The order is not appealable judge issues a certificate 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). of A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (2006). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 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 v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mitchell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2

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.