US v. Tyree Blank

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case numbers: 4:03-cr-00388-TLW-1,4:07-cv-70017-TL. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998417188] [10-6575]

US v. Tyree Blank

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6575 Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/02/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6575 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. TYREE MAURICE BLANKS, Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:03-cr-00388-TLW-1; 4:07-cv-70017-TL) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: September 2, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyree Maurice Blanks, Appellant Pro Se. Carrie Ann Fisher, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6575 Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/02/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Tyree Maurice Blanks seeks to appeal the district

court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 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). 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. 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 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. 529 U.S. at 484-85. Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Blanks 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

2

Case: 10-6575 Document: 8

Date Filed: 09/02/2010

Page: 3

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. DISMISSED

3