US v. Robert Legette, No. 12-7668 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7668 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROBERT ANDRE LEGETTE, a/k/a Base, a/k/a Andre Legette, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:09-cr-01370-TLW-1) Submitted: January 22, 2013 Decided: January 25, 2013 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Andre Legette, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert Andre Legette seeks to appeal the district court s orders (1) denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion; and (2) denying his motion for court s reconsideration. denial of We Legette s reversible error. have reviewed § 3582(c)(2) the district and find motion no Accordingly, we affirm the district court s orders in part for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Legette, No. 4:09-cr-01370-TLW-1 (D.S.C. Aug. 22, 2012 & Sept. 18, 2012). The Legette s district § 2255 appealable court s motion unless a and denying circuit certificate of appealability. A certificate of orders denying relief reconsideration justice or judge are issues on not a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). appealability will not issue 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 prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. When the district court denies Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find constitutional 529 U.S. by that the claims 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 2 prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states claim of the denial of a constitutional right. a debatable Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Legette has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in part. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART 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.
