US v. Willie McCain, No. 09-7438 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7438 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WILLIE JUNIOR MCCAIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (4:05-cr-00011-jlk-1; 7:07-cv-00301-jlk-mfu) Submitted: December 15, 2009 Decided: December 18, 2009 Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie Junior McCain, Appellant Pro Se. Charlene Day, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Willie court s order Junior denying McCain his seeks Fed. R. to Civ. appeal P. the 60(b) district motion for reconsideration of the district court s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. not appealable unless a circuit certificate of appealability. Reid v. Angelone, A certificate of 369 justice or The order is judge issues a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); F.3d 363, appealability will 369 not (4th Cir. issue 2004). 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 We have McCain independently has not made reviewed the the record requisite and 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 2 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.