U.S.
v.
Timms

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth CircuitOct 21, 2009
333 Fed. Appx. 756 (4th Cir. 2009)

No. 09-6929.

Submitted: October 15, 2009.

Decided: October 21, 2009.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:05-cr-00508-WDQ-1; 1:08-cv-02607-WDQ).

Robert Gregory Timms, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher John Romano, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Robert Gregory Timms seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (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). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Timms has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Timms' motion for transcripts at Government expense, 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.