US v. Gary Lackey

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:11-cr-00052-RLV-1,5:14-cv-00054-RLV Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999517820]. Mailed to: Lackey. [14-7431]

Appeal: 14-7431

Doc: 5

Filed: 01/27/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7431

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GARY RICHARD LACKEY,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge.
(5:11-cr-00052-RLV-1; 5:14-cv-00054RLV)

Submitted:

January 22, 2015

Decided:

January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. *

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Richard Lackey, Appellant Pro Se.
Steven R. Kaufman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
*

The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2012).

Appeal: 14-7431

Doc: 5

Filed: 01/27/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Gary

Richard

Lackey

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) and Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e) motions.

The orders are 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

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 Lackey 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: 14-7431

Doc: 5

contentions

Filed: 01/27/2015

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3