US v. Lynval Anderson, Jr.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 2:98-cr-00143-HCM-1, 2:00-cv-00522-HCM. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999666953]. Mailed to: Lynval Anderson, Jr., & Laura Tayman. [14-7399]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7399 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/28/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7399 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LYNVAL KERRIS ANDERSON, JR., a/k/a Peter, a/k/a Lynval Kerris, a/k/a Amxmill Kerris, a/k/a Joseph Anderson, a/k/a Michael Reid, a/k/a Jamaican Pete, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:98-cr-00143-HCM-1; 2:00-cv-00522-HCM) Submitted: September 17, 2015 Decided: September 28, 2015 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lynval Kerris Anderson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Virginia, for Appellee. Laura Pellatiro Newport News, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-7399 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/28/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Lynval Kerris Anderson, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. unless a circuit appealability. justice or The order is not appealable judge issues a certificate 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). of 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 must 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 Anderson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. dispense with oral argument because 2 the facts and We legal Appeal: 14-7399 Doc: 15 contentions are Filed: 09/28/2015 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?