US v. Richard William
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 5:01-cr-00012-RLV-1,5:12-cv-00132-RLV Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999406815]. Mailed to: Williams. [14-6350]
Appeal: 14-6350
Doc: 13
Filed: 07/31/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6350
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RICHARD LYNN WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge.
(5:01-cr-00012-RLV-1; 5:12-cv-00132RLV)
Submitted:
July 29, 2014
Decided:
July 31, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard Lynn Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Jack M. Knight, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-6350
Doc: 13
Filed: 07/31/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Richard
court’s
order
or
Williams
dismissing
(2012) motion.
justice
Lynn
as
seeks
to
successive
appeal
his
28
the
district
U.S.C.
§ 2255
The order is not appealable unless a circuit
judge
issues
a
certificate
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
of
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) (2012).
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 Williams has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We
dispense
with
oral
argument
2
because
the
facts
and
legal
Appeal: 14-6350
Doc: 13
contentions
are
Filed: 07/31/2014
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?