US v. Henry Privette, Jr., No. 12-7450 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7450 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. HENRY RAYFORD PRIVETTE, JR., a/k/a H. R. Privette, a/k/a Ray Picard, d/b/a Carolina Furniture, Incorporated, d/b/a carolinafurniture.com, d/b/a Henry Ray Furniture Export, Incorporated, d/b/a Carolina Furniture Factory Direct from High Point, NC, Incorporated, d/b/a Miller Burns International Home Furnishings, Ltd., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:07-cr-00133-BO-1; 7:11-cv-00145-BO) Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: January 14, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Rayford Privette, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Carolina, for Appellee. Jennifer P. MayRaleigh, North Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Henry Rayford Privette, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) reconsideration. justice or motion and denying his motion for The orders are not appealable unless a circuit judge issues a certificate U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). of appealability. 28 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 court s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 Cockrell, (2000); (2003). see Miller-El v. 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 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 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Privette has not made the requisite showing. we deny the motion dismiss the appeal. facts and legal for a certificate of Accordingly, appealability and We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are 2 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.
