US v. Ira Taylor
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:13-cr-00078-JFM-1,1:15-cv-03747-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Ira Taylor FCI FAIRTON FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 420 Fairton, NJ 08320-0000. [16-6980]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:13-cr-00078-JFM-1; 1:15-cv-03747-JFM)
February 16, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
February 21, 2017
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ira Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin M. Block, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Debra Lynn Dwyer, Assistant United
States Attorney, Michael Clayton Hanlon, Assistant United States
Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; Scott Andrew Lemmon, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina; Henry
Brandis Marsh, Jr., Assistant State’s Attorney, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
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
Taylor has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
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?