US v. Gregory Milton


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:95-cr-70074-MFU-1,5:14-cv-80785-MFU-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999704640]. Mailed to: Gregory Milton. [15-6897]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6897 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/23/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6897 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GREGORY A. MILTON, a/k/a G, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (5:95-cr-70074-MFU-1; 5:14-cv-80785-MFU-RSB) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gregory A. Milton, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Paul United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Giorno, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-6897 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/23/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Gregory A. orders motion to be seeks Milton’s finding Milton most an to appeal recent unauthorized, the 28 district U.S.C. successive court’s § 2255 § 2255 (2012) motion, and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction, and denying Milton’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend that order. orders are issues not a appealable certificate § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). issue absent “a unless of circuit justice appealability. or 28 judge U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” a The 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 Milton has not made the requisite showing. a certificate of appealability 2 and Accordingly, we deny dismiss the appeal. We Appeal: 15-6897 Doc: 10 dispense with contentions are Filed: 11/23/2015 oral argument adequately Pg: 3 of 3 because presented in the the facts and legal 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?