US v. Hendrick Cousar

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999798387-2]. Originating case numbers: 0:11-cr-02276-JFA-3, 0:14-cv-04410-JFA. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999919735]. Mailed to: Appellant. [16-6299]

Appeal: 16-6299

Doc: 12

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6299

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HENDRICK A. COUSAR, a/k/a Tony,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (0:11-cr-02276-JFA-3; 0:14-cv-04410-JFA)

Submitted:

August 25, 2016

Decided:

August 30, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hendrick A. Cousar, Appellant Pro Se.
Tommie DeWayne Pearson,
Julius Ness Richardson, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6299

Doc: 12

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Hendrick A. Cousar seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and
denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
appealable

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

justice

The orders are not
or

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
Cousar has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

Cousar’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss
the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
2

Appeal: 16-6299

before

Doc: 12

this

court

Filed: 08/30/2016

and

Pg: 3 of 3

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED

3