US v. Tariq Vaughn

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status. Originating case number: 3:08-cr-00468-HEH-1, 3:11-cv-00789-HEH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999663476]. Mailed to: Tariq A. Vaughn. [15-6465]

Appeal: 15-6465

Doc: 14

Filed: 09/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6465

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TARIQ A. VAUGHN,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:08-cr-00468-HEH-1; 3:11-cv-00789-HEH)

Submitted:

August 28, 2015

Decided:

September 21, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tariq A. Vaughn, Appellant Pro Se. Olivia L. Norman, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6465

Doc: 14

Filed: 09/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Tariq A. Vaughn seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and his
motion

for

unless

a

reconsideration.

circuit

appealability.

justice

The

or

orders

judge

are

issues

a

not

appealable

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

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

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
Vaughn 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: 15-6465

Doc: 14

contentions

are

Filed: 09/21/2015

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3