US v. Damon Emanuel Elliott
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:97-cr-00053-PJM-1,8:14-cv-02732-PJM,8:14-cv-02742-PJM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999499200]. Mailed to: D. Elliott. [14-7382]
Appeal: 14-7382
Doc: 10
Filed: 12/23/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7382
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAMON EMANUEL ELLIOTT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
Judge.
(8:97-cr-00053-PJM-1; 8:14-cv-02732-PJM; 8:14-cv-02742PJM)
Submitted:
December 18, 2014
Decided:
December 23, 2014
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Damon Emanuel Elliott, Appellant Pro Se.
Sujit Raman, Assistant United States
Maryland, for Appellee.
Lindsay Eyler Kaplan,
Attorneys, Greenbelt,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-7382
Doc: 10
Filed: 12/23/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Damon
Emanuel
Elliott
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s order dismissing without prejudice his petition filed
under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) and his motion filed pursuant to
28
U.S.C.
§
1651
(2012),
of
or
issues
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue
absent
“a
2255
appealability.
(2012)
28
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.”
§
court
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
of
U.S.C.
district
motions.
certificate
28
the
construed
a
successive
which
properly
judge
as
both
showing
of
the
denial
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
of
a
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 Elliott has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
2
Appeal: 14-7382
We
Doc: 10
dispense
contentions
Filed: 12/23/2014
with
are
Pg: 3 of 3
oral
because
argument
adequately
presented
in
the
facts
and
the
materials
legal
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?