United States of America v. John K. Williams

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-8031
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN K. WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 06-8032
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN K. WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 06-8036
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
JOHN K. WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (3:02-cr-00548-CMC; 3:03-cr-00838-CMC; 3:05-cv-02669-CMC;
3:05-cv-2670-CMC)
Submitted: May 23, 2007 Decided: June 1, 2007
Before WILKINSON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alvin Ernest Entin, ENTIN, DELLA FERA & GREENBERG, PA, Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, for Appellant. Jane Barrett Taylor, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
John K. Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders and judgment denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000)
motion and his motions for reconsideration or to alter/amend. The
orders are 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 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 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude Williams has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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

-- 3 of 3 --