US v. Jerry Jackson, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:13-cr-00560-CMC-2,3:15-cv-00778-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999738663]. Mailed to: Jerry Jackson, Jr.. [15-7738]

Appeal: 15-7738

Doc: 8

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7738

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JERRY JACKSON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (3:13-cr-00560-CMC-2; 3:15-cv-00778-CMC)

Submitted:

January 14, 2016

Decided:

January 20, 2016

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Jackson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Stanley D. Ragsdale,
Julius Ness Richardson, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7738

Doc: 8

Filed: 01/20/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jerry Jackson, Jr., 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

(2012).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

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.

Slack

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

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
Jackson has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny Jackson’s motion for a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

2

adequately

presented

in

the

Appeal: 15-7738

Doc: 8

materials

before

Filed: 01/20/2016

this

court

Pg: 3 of 3

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.
DISMISSED

3