US v. Tuval McKoy

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying a certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 5:93-cr-00102-F-8,5:12-cv-00368-F. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999801399]. Mailed to: Tuval McKoy. [15-7750]

Appeal: 15-7750

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7750

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TUVAL MCKOY,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:93-cr-00102-F-8; 5:12-cv-00368-F)

Submitted:

March 30, 2016

Decided:

April 22, 2016

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tuval McKoy, Appellant Pro Se.
Barbara Dickerson Kocher,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7750

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Tuval
dismissing

McKoy
his

seeks

motion

to

appeal

for

a

the

district

certificate

of

court’s

order

appealability

in

which he sought reconsideration of the court’s previous order
accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive.
not

appealable

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

justice

or

The order is

judge

issues

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

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
McKoy has not made the requisite showing.
a

certificate

of

appealability
2

and

Accordingly, we deny

dismiss

the

appeal.

We

Appeal: 15-7750

Doc: 9

dispense

Filed: 04/22/2016

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3