US v. Wallace M. Bryant, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [999924563-2] Originating case number: 8:13-cr-00121-HMH-1,8:16-cv-02189-HMH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Bryant. [16-7067]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
WALLACE M. BRYANT, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (8:13-cr-00121-HMH-1; 8:16-cv-02189-HMH)
December 15, 2016
December 20, 2016
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wallace M. Bryant, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina,
William Jacob Watkins, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012)
motion and his subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
A certificate of appealability will not
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
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 a
debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Bryant 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?