US v. John Johnson
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999598123-2] Originating case number: 4:08-cr-01258-RBH-5,4:14-cv-01584-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: John Johnson. [15-6778]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
JOHN MARQUIS JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
October 29, 2015
November 10, 2015
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Marquis Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Robert Frank Daley,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
John Marquis Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and
denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend the
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
A certificate of appealability
will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Johnson has not made the requisite showing.
deny Johnson’s motion for a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the
Pg: 3 of 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?