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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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UNPUBLISHED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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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