US v. Louis Bryant

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status. Originating case number: 3:04-cr-00047-NKM-1, 3:14-cv-80754-NKM-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999681523]. Mailed to: Louis Antonio Bryant. [15-7047]

Appeal: 15-7047

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/20/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7047

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LOUIS ANTONIO BRYANT, a/k/a Tinio,
a/k/a Black, a/k/a B Stacks,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Charlottesville.
Norman K. Moon,
Senior District Judge. (3:04-cr-00047-NKM-1; 3:14-cv-80754-NKMRSB)

Submitted:

October 15, 2015

Decided:

October 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis Antonio Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Mitchell Huber,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7047

Doc: 7

Filed: 10/20/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Louis Antonio Bryant seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion without
prejudice

and

orders

are

issues

a

denying

not

appealable

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue

his

absent

“a

motion
unless
of

a

reconsideration.

circuit

justice

appealability.

The

or

28

judge
U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

for

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
Bryant 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: 15-7047

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 10/20/2015

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3