US v. Wallace M. Bryant, Jr.
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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. [999990782]. Mailed to: Bryant. [16-7067]
Appeal: 16-7067
Doc: 8
Filed: 12/20/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7067
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
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)
Submitted:
December 15, 2016
Decided:
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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7067
Doc: 8
Filed: 12/20/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Wallace
M.
Bryant,
Jr.,
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012)
motion and his subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
orders
are
issues
not
a
appealable
certificate
§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue
absent
“a
unless
of
circuit
justice
appealability.
or
28
judge
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.”
a
The
showing
of
the
denial
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
of
a
When the
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this
standard
by
demonstrating
that
reasonable
jurists
would
find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484
Cockrell,
(2000);
(2003).
see
Miller-El
v.
537
U.S.
322,
336-38
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.
Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Bryant has not made the requisite showing.
a
certificate
further
dispense
deny
with
of
appealability
Bryant’s
oral
motion
argument
and
for
a
dismiss
the
sentence
because
2
Accordingly, we deny
the
appeal.
We
reduction.
We
facts
and
legal
Appeal: 16-7067
Doc: 8
contentions
Filed: 12/20/2016
are
adequately
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?