From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Babb

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Oct 15, 2012
485 F. App'x 641 (4th Cir. 2012)

Opinion

No. 12-6847

10-15-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WALTER BABB, a/k/a Brian, a/k/a B, a/k/a WB, Defendant - Appellant.

Walter Babb, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen Lipton Hollander, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00190-ELH-3; 1:11-cv-02180-ELH) Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Walter Babb, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Walter Babb seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) 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." 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 (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 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Babb has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED


Summaries of

United States v. Babb

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Oct 15, 2012
485 F. App'x 641 (4th Cir. 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Babb

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WALTER BABB, a/k/a…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 15, 2012

Citations

485 F. App'x 641 (4th Cir. 2012)

Citing Cases

Babb v. United States

ECF 187. I denied the motion in a 49-page Memorandum Opinion and Order. ECF 197, ECF 199. Babb's ensuing…

Babb v. United States

His ensuing appeal was dismissed by the Fourth Circuit. ECF 209; see United States v. Babb, 485 Fed.Appx. 641…