US v. Lionel William

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 2:90-cr-00149-RGD-2,2:13-cv-00005-RGD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999680362]. Mailed to: Lionel Elizah Williams. [14-7468]

Appeal: 14-7468

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7468

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LIONEL ELIZAH WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:90-cr-00149-RGD-2; 2:13-cv-00005-RGD)

Submitted:

September 14, 2015

Before MOTZ and
Circuit Judge.

KEENAN,

Circuit

Decided:

Judges,

and

October 19, 2015

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lionel Elizah Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Marie Yusi,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7468

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Lionel Elizah Williams 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 dismissing his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive.

The order is not

appealable

judge

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

justice

or

issues

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

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.

satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

standard

find

U.S.

that

the

claims

constitutional
529

by

is

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
Williams 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: 14-7468

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 10/19/2015

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3