US v. Kirk Loney
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:02-cr-00290-REP-1,3:11-cv-00337-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999386887]. Mailed to: KIRK L. LONEY. [14-6274]
Appeal: 14-6274
Doc: 12
Filed: 07/01/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6274
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KIRK L. LONEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:02-cr-00290-REP-1; 3:11-cv-00337-REP)
Submitted:
June 26, 2014
Decided:
July 1, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kirk L. Loney, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Arlen Jagels, Special
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Stephen
Wiley
Miller,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-6274
Doc: 12
Filed: 07/01/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Kirk L. Loney seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion,
denying his motion to amend and his motion for reconsideration,
and construing his motion for leave to amend as a successive
§ 2255 motion and dismissing it.
unless
a
circuit
appealability.
justice
or
The orders are not appealable
judge
issues
a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
certificate
of
A certificate
of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2012).
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 Loney 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: 14-6274
Doc: 12
contentions
are
Filed: 07/01/2014
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?