US v. Dalton Pierce
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 3:10-cr-00268-HEH-1,3:12-cv-00071-HEH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999537633]. Mailed to: D. Pierce. [14-7680]
Appeal: 14-7680
Doc: 6
Filed: 03/02/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7680
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DALTON DEVON PIERCE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:10-cr-00268-HEH-1; 3:12-cv-00071-HEH)
Submitted:
February 25, 2015
Decided:
March 2, 2015
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dalton Devon Pierce, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Ronald Gill,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-7680
Doc: 6
Filed: 03/02/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Dalton
Devon
28
U.S.C.
the
district
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
certificate
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue
absent
“a
of
§ 2255
appealability.
28
(2012)
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.”
his
appeal
motion.
a
on
to
order
issues
relief
seeks
court’s
judge
denying
Pierce
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 Pierce 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: 14-7680
Doc: 6
contentions
Filed: 03/02/2015
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?