US v. Adam Joe Jordan, III


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:11-cr-00011-RLV-DSC-1,5:14-cv-00090-RLV Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999606407]. Mailed to: Adam Jordan, III. [15-6229]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6229 Doc: 5 Filed: 06/22/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6229 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ADAM JOE LOUIS JORDAN, III, Defendant -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-00011-RLV-DSC-1; 5:14-cv00090-RLV) Submitted: June 18, 2015 Decided: June 22, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adam Joe Louis Jordan, III, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorneys, Asheville, North Carolina; William Michael Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Dana Owen Washington, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6229 Doc: 5 Filed: 06/22/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Adam Joe Louis Jordan, III, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. or The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice judge issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). issue absent “a appealability. 28 U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” of 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 Jordan has not made the requisite showing. a certificate dispense with of appealability oral argument and dismiss because 2 Accordingly, we deny the the appeal. facts and We legal Appeal: 15-6229 Doc: 5 contentions Filed: 06/22/2015 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?