US v. Percell Burrow
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 4:08-cr-00147-AWA-FBS-5 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: PERCELL BURROWS. [15-6305]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
PERCELL BURROWS, a/k/a Light,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (4:08-cr-00147-AWA-FBS-5)
July 21, 2015
July 23, 2015
Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Percell Burrows, Appellant Pro Se.
Howard Jacob Zlotnick,
Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Percell Burrows seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).
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.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 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 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
Burrows has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
Pg: 3 of 3
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?