US v. Darrell F. Gist
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion for leave to file additional argument [999147453-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999124311-2], denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999095823-2] Originating case number: 4:02-cr-00207-TLW-1,4:13-cv-00159-TLW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999225463]. Mailed to: Darrell Gist. [13-6667]
Appeal: 13-6667
Doc: 13
Filed: 10/24/2013
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6667
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DARRELL F. GIST,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (4:02-cr-00207-TLW-1; 4:13-cv-00159-TLW)
Submitted:
October 22, 2013
Decided:
October 24, 2013
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darrell F. Gist, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-6667
Doc: 13
Filed: 10/24/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Darrell F. Gist seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion
as
untimely.
justice
or
The
judge
order
issues
is
a
not
appealable
certificate
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).
of
unless
a
circuit
appealability.
28
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.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484
Cockrell,
(2000);
(2003).
see
Miller-El
v.
537
U.S.
322,
336-38
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.
Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Gist has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny Gist’s motions for a certificate of appealability, grant
his motion to file additional argument, and dismiss the appeal.
We
dispense
with
oral
argument
2
because
the
facts
and
legal
Appeal: 13-6667
Doc: 13
contentions
are
Filed: 10/24/2013
adequately
Pg: 3 of 3
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?