US v. Darrell Wright

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999560376-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999548427-2]. Originating case number: 4:06-cr-00207-TLW-3, 4:14-cv-04421-TLW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999590527].. [15-6395]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6395 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/27/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6395 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DARRELL TAMAR WRIGHT, a/k/a D. Wright, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (4:06-cr-00207-TLW-3) Submitted: May 21, 2015 Decided: May 27, 2015 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell Tamar Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Jimmie Ewing, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Arthur Bradley Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6395 Doc: 14 Filed: 05/27/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Darrell Tamar Wright seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). issue absent “a of appealability. U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” 28 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 Wright has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Wright’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed dispense in with forma pauperis, oral argument and dismiss because 2 the the appeal. facts and We legal Appeal: 15-6395 Doc: 14 contentions are Filed: 05/27/2015 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?