US v. Clarence Jupiter


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999577370-2] Originating case number: 5:93-cr-00004-MFU-1,7:98-cv-00016-MFU Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999645627]. Mailed to: Clarence Jupiter. [14-7705]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7705 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/24/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7705 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CLARENCE SHELDON JUPITER, a/k/a Star, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (5:93-cr-00004-MFU-1; 7:98-cv-00016-MFU) Submitted: August 20, 2015 Decided: August 24, 2015 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Sheldon Jupiter, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-7705 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/24/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Clarence court’s Sheldon order Jupiter denying his seeks Fed. R. to appeal Civ. P. the 60(b) district 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 both on procedural that the When the district court grounds, dispositive the prisoner procedural ruling must 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 Jupiter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Jupiter’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. facts and legal We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are 2 adequately presented in the Appeal: 14-7705 Doc: 11 materials before Filed: 08/24/2015 this court Pg: 3 of 3 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?