US v. Milton Gonzalez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 8:09-cr-00302-RWT-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000005368]. Mailed to: Milton Antonio Gonzalez. [16-6580, 16-7031]

Appeal: 16-6580

Doc: 15

Filed: 01/18/2017

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6580

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MILTON ANTONIO GONZALEZ, a/k/a Milton Antonio GonzalezRodriguez, a/k/a Peres Aguilarjose, a/k/a Jose Lopez,
Defendant – Appellant.

No. 16-7031

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MILTON ANTONIO GONZALEZ, a/k/a Milton Antonio GonzalezRodriguez, a/k/a Peres Aguilarjose, a/k/a Jose Lopez,
Defendant – Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
(8:09-cr-00302-RWT-1; 8:15-cv-02501-RWT)

Submitted:

December 16, 2016

Decided:

January 18, 2017

Appeal: 16-6580

Doc: 15

Filed: 01/18/2017

Pg: 2 of 4

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit
Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Milton Antonio Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se.
Debra Lynn Dwyer,
Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-6580

Doc: 15

Filed: 01/18/2017

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Milton Antonio Gonzalez seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) proceeding, which dismissed
as untimely his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and
denied relief on the challenge to his sentence pursuant to Johnson
v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015).

A prisoner may not

appeal a district court’s ruling in a § 2255 action 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.”

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

When the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find
that the district 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).
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 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
Gonzalez has not made the requisite showing as to either the
ineffective assistance claims or the Johnson claim.
3

Accordingly,

Appeal: 16-6580

Doc: 15

Filed: 01/18/2017

Pg: 4 of 4

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals.
We

dispense

with

oral

argument

because

the

facts

and

legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

4