US v. Markis Allen

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:13-cr-00004-BO-1,4:15-cv-00043-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999684739]. Mailed to: M. Allen. [15-6927]

Appeal: 15-6927

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/23/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6927

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARKIS RASAAN ALLEN,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (4:13-cr-00004-BO-1; 4:15-cv-00043-BO)

Submitted:

October 15, 2015

Decided:

October 23, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Markis Rasaan Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Assistant
United States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6927

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/23/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Markis Rasaan Allen 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.

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).

28 U.S.C.

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 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
Allen has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

We dispense
and

legal

Appeal: 15-6927

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/23/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3