US v. James Baylor
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:11-cr-00064-JRS-1, 3:14-cv-00840-JRS. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999947337]. Mailed to: James Baylor. [16-6459]
Appeal: 16-6459
Doc: 8
Filed: 10/14/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6459
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMES DERRICK BAYLOR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, Senior
District Judge. (3:11-cr-00064-JRS-1; 3:14-cv-00840-JRS)
Submitted:
October 7, 2016
Decided:
October 14, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Derrick Baylor, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Arlen Jagels,
Special Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6459
Doc: 8
Filed: 10/14/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
James Derrick Baylor seeks to appeal the district court’s
order 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.
(2012).
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
When
prisoner
the
district
court
satisfies
this
jurists
would
reasonable
denies
relief
standard
find
by
that
on
the
merits,
demonstrating
the
district
a
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
Baylor 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: 16-6459
Doc: 8
contentions
Filed: 10/14/2016
are
adequately
Pg: 3 of 3
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
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?