US v. Kennedy Kemp

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:14-cr-00098-MOC-1,3:16-cv-00219-MOC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000006346]. Mailed to: K Kemp. [16-7052]

Appeal: 16-7052

Doc: 11

Filed: 01/19/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7052

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KENNEDY KEMP, a/k/a Leon Barrington Oakley, Jr.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Max O. Cogburn,
District Judge. (3:14-cr-00098-MOC-1; 3:16-cv-00219-MOC)

Submitted:

December 12, 2016

Before GREGORY,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

DIAZ

and

January 19, 2017

HARRIS,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kennedy Kemp, Appellant Pro Se.
Elizabeth Margaret Greenough,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7052

Doc: 11

Filed: 01/19/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kennedy Kemp seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.

The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

appealability

will

not

issue

absent

“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief

on

the

merits,

demonstrating
district

that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

standard

find

U.S.

that

the

claims

constitutional
529

by

is

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

claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

a

debatable

Slack, 529 U.S.

at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Kemp has not made the requisite showing.
certificate
dispense

of

with

appealability
oral

argument

and

dismiss

because

2

Accordingly, we deny a

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 16-7052

Doc: 11

contentions

are

Filed: 01/19/2017

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3