US v. Louis Bryant

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:04-cr-00047-NKM-RSB-1,3:14-cv-80748-NKM-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999460207]. Mailed to: Louis Antonio Bryant. [14-7019]

Appeal: 14-7019

Doc: 6

Filed: 10/22/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LOUIS ANTONIO
Stacks,

BRYANT,

a/k/a

Tinio,

a/k/a

Black,

a/k/a

B

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville.
Norman K. Moon,
Senior District Judge. (3:04-cr-00047-NKM-RSB-1; 3:14-cv-80748NKM-RSB)

Submitted:

October 16, 2014

Decided:

October 22, 2014

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis Antonio Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Mitchell Huber,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7019

Doc: 6

Filed: 10/22/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Louis
court’s

order

Antonio

Bryant

treating

his

seeks

motion

to
to

appeal
be

the

district

resentenced

as

a

successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and dismissing it on
that

basis.

justice

or

The
judge

order
issues

is
a

not

appealable

certificate

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

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) (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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Bryant has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
and dismiss the appeal.

we

deny

a

certificate

of

appealability

We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

2

Appeal: 14-7019

Doc: 6

materials

before

Filed: 10/22/2014

this

court

Pg: 3 of 3

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

3