US v. Anthony Trappier

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. A certificate of appealability is denied. Originating case number: 4:09-cr-00340-TLW-1, 4:12-cv-03313-TLW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999804208]. Mailed to: Anthony Gene Trappier. [15-7997]

Appeal: 15-7997

Doc: 10

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7997

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY GENE TRAPPIER,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (4:09-cr-00340-TLW-1; 4:12-cv-03313-TLW)

Submitted:

April 21, 2016

Decided: April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Gene Trappier, Appellant Pro Se.
Robert Frank
Daley, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
Carolina,
Arthur
Bradley
Parham,
Assistant
United
States
Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7997

Doc: 10

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Anthony Gene Trappier seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, as
well as its order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
orders are
issues

not

a

appealable

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

unless
of

circuit

justice

appealability.

or

28

judge
U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

a

The

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
Trappier 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: 15-7997

Doc: 10

contentions

are

Filed: 04/26/2016

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3