US v. David Ramey, Jr.
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to file supplemental brief(s) [999399654-2]. Originating case numbers: 7:09-cr-00054-GEC-RSB-1,7:13-cv-80603-GEC-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999443846]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-6629]
Appeal: 14-6629
Doc: 10
Filed: 09/26/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6629
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID ALEXANDER RAMEY, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge.
(7:09-cr-00054-GEC-RSB-1; 7:13-cv-80603-GECRSB)
Submitted:
September 15, 2014
Decided:
September 26, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Alexander Ramey, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Ronald Andrew
Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-6629
Doc: 10
Filed: 09/26/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
David
district
Alexander
court’s
order
§ 2255 (2012) motion.
Ramey,
Jr.,
dismissing
seeks
as
to
untimely
appeal
his
28
the
U.S.C.
The order is not appealable unless a
circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28
U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1)(B)
(2012).
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
ruling
must
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 Ramey has not made the requisite showing.
although
we
grant
Ramey’s
motion
to
supplement
Accordingly,
his
informal
brief, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
appeal.
legal
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
are
adequately
2
presented
in
the
materials
Appeal: 14-6629
before
Doc: 10
this
court
Filed: 09/26/2014
and
Pg: 3 of 3
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?