US v. Demetrious Moore, No. 13-7109 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7109 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. DEMETRIOUS ADONIS MOORE, a/k/a Meechie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:08-cr-00124-HMH-1; 6:13-cv-01236-HMH) Submitted: November 26, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Demetrious Adonis Moore, Howard, Assistant United Carolina, for Appellee. Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean States Attorney, Greenville, South Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Demetrious Adonis Moore seeks to appeal the district court s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (2006). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this jurists would reasonable standard find by that demonstrating the district that court s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). denies relief demonstrate both on procedural that the When the district court grounds, dispositive the prisoner procedural ruling must 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 Moore has not made the requisite showing. * * Accordingly, we We note that, in his third claim for relief, Moore asserted that his counsel was ineffective in failing to challenge his resentencing proceedings on the grounds that the district judge exhibited bias and prejudice against him not, as the district court construed the claim, a challenge based on the (Continued) 2 deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED procedural and substantive reasonableness of his sentence. Nevertheless, having reviewed the record and Moore s submissions on appeal, we conclude that Moore fails to make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability on this issue. 3