US v. Ismalius White

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:06-cr-00068-FL-1,4:11-cv-00083-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999123048]. Mailed to: Ismalius White, Thomas Anglim and J. Frank Bradsher. [13-6328]--[Edited 06/05/2013 by CH]

Appeal: 13-6328

Doc: 11

Filed: 06/05/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6328

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ISMALIUS JARON WHITE,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (4:06-cr-00068-FL-1; 4:11-cv-00083-FL)

Submitted:

May 30, 2013

Decided:

June 5, 2013

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ismalius Jaron White, Appellant Pro Se.
Edward D. Gray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Thomas D. Anglim, J. Frank
Bradsher, Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-6328

Doc: 11

Filed: 06/05/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ismalius
court’s

order

Jaron

accepting

White
the

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

of

the
the

district

magistrate

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2012) motion

and

the

order

denying

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
unless

a

circuit

appealability.

justice

or

his

motion

to

reconsider

The orders are not appealable
judge

issues

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

certificate

of

A certificate

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2006).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

ruling

is

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
denial of a constitutional right.

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that White has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because
2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 13-6328

Doc: 11

contentions

are

Filed: 06/05/2013

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3