US v. Ava Ramey

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 8:12-cr-00309-RWT-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999766205]. Mailed to: Ava Ramey. [15-8039]

Appeal: 15-8039

Doc: 13

Filed: 03/02/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8039

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
AVA RAMEY,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
(8:12-cr-00309-RWT-1)

Submitted:

February 25, 2016

Before SHEDD and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Circuit

Decided:

Judges,

and

March 2, 2016

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ava Ramey, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory P. Bailey, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Sujit Raman, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-8039

Doc: 13

Filed: 03/02/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ava

Ramey

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s

order

denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of
the

district

court’s

order

§ 2255 (2012) motion.

denying

relief

on

her

28

U.S.C.

The order is 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

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

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
Ramey has not made the requisite showing.
a

certificate

dispense

with

of

appealability

oral

argument

and

dismiss

because

2

Accordingly, we deny

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 15-8039

Doc: 13

contentions

are

Filed: 03/02/2016

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3