US v. Ronald Bernard Walker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to expedite decision [999932630-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999918935-2] Originating case number: 3:04-cr-00074-FDW-CH-1,3:16-cv-00451-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000038974]. Mailed to: Walker. [16-7076]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7076 Doc: 7 Filed: 03/09/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7076 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONALD BERNARD WALKER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:04-cr-00074-FDW-CH-1; 3:16-cv-00451FDW) Submitted: February 28, 2017 Decided: March 9, 2017 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Bernard Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Freeman Greene, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7076 Doc: 7 Filed: 03/09/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Ronald Bernard Walker 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 (2012). of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) A certificate of 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 demonstrating district merits, that court’s debatable or a When the district court denies prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, 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 Walker has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Walker’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. decision. legal We deny as moot Walker’s motion to expedite We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials Appeal: 16-7076 before Doc: 7 this Filed: 03/09/2017 court and Pg: 3 of 3 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?