# United States v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 1, 2006 · 170 F. App'x 269

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1018627

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Johnny Lee BROWN, Defendant—Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 1, 2006
- **Citations:** 170 F. App'x 269
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Widener, Niemeyer, King
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1018627

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7208

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHNNY LEE BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
District Judge. (CR-01-6; CA-03-182)

Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 1, 2006

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Johnny Lee Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and his 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 (2000) petition which the court construed under § 2255. An

appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding

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 the district court’s assessment of his

constitutional claims is 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 Brown 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 -

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1018627. Public record. Not legal advice.