US v. Jose Amu, No. 10-7297 (4th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7297 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JOSE NACACIO AMU, a/k/a Amu, a/k/a Sld Dft 3:97-40-11, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:97-cr-00040-FDW-11; 3:10-cv-00381-FDW) Submitted: December 21, 2010 Decided: January 4, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jose Nacacio Amu, Appellant Pro Se. Michael E. Savage, Jennifer A. Youngs, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jose Amu appeals the district court s order treating his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for a reduction in sentence as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion and dismissing unless appealable it circuit a on certificate of appealability. Jones v. Braxton, certificate of 392 F.3d that basis. justice The or order judge is issues not a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); 683, appealability 691 will (4th not Cir. A absent issue 2004). 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 procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states constitutional right. a debatable claim of the denial of a Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Amu has not made the requisite showing. certificate dispense of with appealability oral argument and Accordingly, we deny a dismiss because the the appeal. facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 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.