US v. Rico Joy
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 4:06-cr-01317-TLW-6,4:14-cv-02187-TLW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999460221]. Mailed to: Rico Jaruiase Joy. [14-7276]
Appeal: 14-7276
Doc: 9
Filed: 10/22/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7276
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RICO JARUIASE JOY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (4:06-cr-01317-TLW-6; 4:14-cv-02187-TLW)
Submitted:
October 16, 2014
Decided:
October 22, 2014
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rico Jaruiase Joy, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Frank Daley, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-7276
Doc: 9
Filed: 10/22/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Rico Jaruiase Joy seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
The
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a
certificate
(2012).
of
appealability.
28
U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1)(B)
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).
relief
on
the
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
When the district court denies
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
Slack
satisfies
jurists
this
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
standard
find
that
the
claims
constitutional
529
by
is
U.S.
473,
484
(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
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
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
a
debatable
Slack, 529 U.S.
at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Joy has not made the requisite showing.
The district court
lacked jurisdiction to consider Joy’s motion to vacate because
it was a successive and unauthorized § 2255 motion.
absence
of
pre-filing
authorization
from
this
In the
court,
the
district court lacks jurisdiction to hear a successive § 2255
2
Appeal: 14-7276
Doc: 9
motion.
Filed: 10/22/2014
Pg: 3 of 3
See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3) (2012).
Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense
with
contentions
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
We
and
legal
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?