United States of America v. Harmon Jones

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
HARMON JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard,
District Judge. (CR-95-149, CA-03-576-5-H)
Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harmon Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Harmon Jones seeks to appeal from the district court’s
order dismissing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) for
failure to state a claim. The order is not appealable unless a
circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner
satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists
would find that his or her constitutional claims are debatable and
that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are
also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,
336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.
Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently
reviewed the record and conclude that Jones 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

-- 2 of 2 --