US v. Tyrone Wilson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:11-cr-00180-RAJ-7,2:15-cv-00408-RAJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999993524]. Mailed to: Tyrone Wilson. [16-6962]

Appeal: 16-6962

Doc: 8

Filed: 12/27/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6962

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TYRONE ALPHONZO WILSON, a/k/a TT,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:11-cr-00180-RAJ-7; 2:15-cv-00408-RAJ)

Submitted:

December 20, 2016

Decided:

December 27, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Alphonzo Wilson, Appellant Pro Se.
Sherrie Scott
Capotosto, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia;
Amy Elizabeth Cross, Special Assistant United States Attorney,
Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6962

Doc: 8

Filed: 12/27/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Alphonzo Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and
denying reconsideration.

The orders are not appealable 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.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

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
Wilson 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: 16-6962

Doc: 8

contentions

Filed: 12/27/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3