US v. Earnest Young


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999923259-2], denying certificate of appealability. Originating case number: 6:07-cr-00833-HMH-1, 6:16-cv-01483-HMH. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000000963]. Mailed to: Earnest Young. [16-7024]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7024 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EARNEST JERMAINE YOUNG, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:07-cr-00833-HMH-1; 6:16-cv-01483-HMH) Submitted: December 30, 2016 Decided: January 10, 2017 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Earnest Jermaine Young, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Earnest Jermaine Young seeks to appeal the district court’s order 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 ruling must 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 Young has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 Appeal: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?