US v. Douglas Stallworth

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to strike [999700722-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999700711-3]; denying Motion for release [999700711-2] Originating case numbers: 1:08-cr-00024-JPJ-RSB-36, 1:13-cv-80586-JPJ-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999785670]. Mailed to: Douglas Stallworth. [15-7443]

Appeal: 15-7443

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/31/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7443

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DOUGLAS LEE STALLWORTH,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Abingdon.
James P. Jones, District
Judge. (1:08-cr-00024-JPJ-RSB-36; 1:13-cv-80586-JPJ-RSB)

Submitted:

March 29, 2016

Decided:

March 31, 2016

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas Lee Stallworth, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. Bockhorst,
Zachary T. Lee, Assistant United States Attorneys, Mary Kathleen
Carnell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abingdon,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7443

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/31/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Douglas Lee Stallworth seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and
denying reconsideration.

The orders are 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.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

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).
denies

relief

demonstrate

both

on

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

ruling

must
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
Stallworth has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny Stallworth’s motions for a certificate of appealability,
for release, and to strike this court’s scheduling order, and
dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are
2

adequately

presented

in

the

Appeal: 15-7443

Doc: 9

materials

before

Filed: 03/31/2016

this

court

Pg: 3 of 3

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

3