US v. Darrell Bostick, No. 10-6598 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Filed: November 4, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6598 (1:05-cr-00200-WO-1; 1:08-cv-00326-AWO-RAE) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DARRELL LAMONT BOSTICK, Defendant - Appellant. O R D E R The Court amends its opinion filed July 1, 2010, as follows: On page 2, lines 2 and 3 of text -- the language accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and is deleted. For the Court By Direction /s/ Patricia S. Connor Clerk UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6598 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. DARRELL LAMONT BOSTICK, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:05-cr-00200-WO-1; 1:08-cv-00326-AWORAE) Submitted: June 24, 2010 Decided: July 1, 2010 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell Lamont Bostick, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Darrell Lamont Bostick seeks to appeal the district court s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 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 369 will (4th not Cir. issue 2004). absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). relief on the demonstrating district debatable merits, that court s or a When the district court denies prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find that U.S. the claims constitutional 529 by is 473, 484 (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 We have Bostick independently has not made reviewed the record requisite and showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 2 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.
