US v. David Phillip
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed denying certificate of appealabilit. Originating case number: 5:12-cr-00236-F-1, 5:15-cv-00435-F. Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: David Phillips. [16-6632]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
DAVID NEIL PHILLIPS, a/k/a Neil Phillips,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:12-cr-00236-F-1; 5:15-cv-00435-F)
November 10, 2016
January 6, 2017
Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Neil Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker,
Assistant United States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
David Neil Phillips seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
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
(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
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
Slack, 529 U.S.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Phillips has not made the requisite showing.
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Pg: 3 of 3
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?