US v. Jeffrey Pleasant

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:00-cr-00071-REP-1,3:14-cv-00259-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999738555]. Mailed to: Jeffrey Pleasant. [15-7681]

Appeal: 15-7681

Doc: 5

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7681

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JEFFREY A. PLEASANT, a/k/a Jeffrey A. Pleasants,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:00-cr-00071-REP-1; 3:14-cv-00259-REP)

Submitted:

January 14, 2016

Decided:

January 20, 2016

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey A. Pleasant, Appellant Pro Se.
Stephen Wiley Miller,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7681

Doc: 5

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey A. Pleasant seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

denying

his

reconsideration

of

Fed.
the

R.

Civ.

district

P.

60(b)

court’s

2003

motion
order

for

denying

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.

The order is not

appealable

judge

unless

a

circuit

justice

or

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.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

standard

find

U.S.

that

the

claims

constitutional
529

by

is

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

claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

a

debatable

Slack, 529 U.S.

at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Pleasant has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because
2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 15-7681

Doc: 5

contentions

Filed: 01/20/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3