US v. Lamatavous Regtez Collin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00466-MBS-3,1:13-cv-03486-MBS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999629133]. Mailed to: Collins. [15-6645]

Appeal: 15-6645

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6645

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LAMATAVOUS REGTEZ COLLINS, a/k/a Red,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District
Judge. (1:10-cr-00466-MBS-3; 1:13-cv-03486-MBS)

Submitted:

July 23, 2015

Decided:

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lamatavous Regtez Collins, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale,
John David Rowell, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6645

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Lamatavous

Regtez

Collins

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues a certificate of appealability.
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

28

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 (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

constitutional right.

a

debatable

claim

of

the

denial

of

a

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Collins has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

this

court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2