US v. Derrick Park
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 5:05-cr-00257-RLV-DCK-2,5:13-cv-00012-RLV Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999514059]. Mailed to: Parks. [14-7519]
Appeal: 14-7519
Doc: 5
Filed: 01/21/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7519
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DERRICK RAYSHAWN PARKS, a/k/a Bam, a/k/a Bam Parks, a/k/a
Rayshawn Parks,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge.
(5:05-cr-00257-RLV-DCK-2; 5:13-cv00012-RLV)
Submitted:
January 15, 2015
Decided:
January 21, 2015
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derrick Rayshawn Parks, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael
Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Adam Christopher
Morris, Thomas A. O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Gretchen C.F. Shappert,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-7519
Doc: 5
Filed: 01/21/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Rayshawn Parks seeks to appeal the district
court’s
order
motion.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
judge
issues
denying
a
relief
certificate
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue
absent
“a
on
of
28
U.S.C.
§ 2255
appealability.
28
(2012)
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.”
his
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 Parks 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: 14-7519
Doc: 5
contentions
Filed: 01/21/2015
are
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?