US v. Troy Walker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cr-00614-PJM-1,8:14-cv-02366-PJM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000006264]. Mailed to: Troy Walker. [16-7094]

Appeal: 16-7094

Doc: 9

Filed: 01/19/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7094

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TROY WALKER, a/k/a Caveman,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge.
(8:12-cr-00614-PJM-1; 8:14-cv-02366-PJM)

Submitted:

January 17, 2017

Decided:

January 19, 2017

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Troy Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Kristi Noel O’Malley, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7094

Doc: 9

Filed: 01/19/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Troy Walker seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying
his motion to reconsider the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012)
motion.
judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

of

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

(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 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
Walker has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

2

Appeal: 16-7094

Doc: 9

adequately

Filed: 01/19/2017

presented

in

the

Pg: 3 of 3

materials

before

this

court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3