US v. John Legrand

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00052-CCB-1,1:14-cv-00087-CCB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999722150]. Mailed to: John Legrand. [15-6452]

Appeal: 15-6452

Doc: 23

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6452

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JOHN FITZGERALD LEGRAND,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Catherine C. Blake, Chief District
Judge. (1:10-cr-00052-CCB-1; 1:14-cv-00087-CCB)

Submitted:

December 17, 2015

Decided:

December 21, 2015

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Fitzgerald Legrand, Appellant Pro Se. Paul E. Budlow,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6452

Doc: 23

Filed: 12/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
John

Fitzgerald

Legrand

28

U.S.C.

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

the

motion.

a

on

appeal

order

issues

relief

to

court’s

judge

denying

seeks

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
Legrand 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: 15-6452

Doc: 23

contentions

are

Filed: 12/21/2015

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3