US v. Percy Tucker
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [1000022504-2]; denying Motion for other relief [999962692-2], denying Motion for other relief [999958897-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999927412-2]; denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999927408-2], denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999923132-3] Originating case number: 2:09-cr-00182-AWA-DEM-1,2:15-cv-00294-AWA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Percy Tucker. [16-7098]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
PERCY JAMES TUCKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District
Judge. (2:09-cr-00182-AWA-DEM-1; 2:15-cv-00294-AWA)
February 22, 2017
February 28, 2017
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Percy James Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Percy James Tucker seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
The orders are not appealable unless a circuit
justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
A certificate of appealability
will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Tucker has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability, deny the pending motions, and
dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the
Pg: 3 of 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?