US v. Anthony Harri
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00289-TDS-1,1:13-cv-00232-TDS-JEP Copies to all parties and the district court. [999871288]. Mailed to: Anthony Vonn Harris. [16-6106]
Appeal: 16-6106
Doc: 9
Filed: 06/28/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6106
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTHONY VONN HARRIS, a/k/a Anthony Vonne Harris,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:10-cr-00289-TDS-1; 1:13-cv-00232-TDS-JEP)
Submitted:
June 23, 2016
Decided:
June 28, 2016
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Vonn Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Clifton Thomas Barrett,
Harry L. Hobgood, Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6106
Doc: 9
Filed: 06/28/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Vonn Harris seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
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 of appealability.
A
certificate
of
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
Harris has not made the requisite showing. *
*
Accordingly, we deny
Specifically, the district court’s dispositive conclusion
— that our decision in United States v. Mungro, 754 F.3d 267
(4th Cir. 2014), foreclosed Harris’ argument that the Supreme
(Continued)
2
Appeal: 16-6106
a
Doc: 9
Filed: 06/28/2016
certificate
dispense
of
with
contentions
are
Pg: 3 of 3
appealability
oral
argument
adequately
and
dismiss
because
presented
in
the
the
the
appeal.
facts
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Court’s holding in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551
(2015), invalidated his armed career criminal designation — is
not debatable.
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?