US v. Everett Kaymore
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:10-cr-00016-MFU-RSB-1, 5:16-cv-81164-MFU-RSB, 5:16-cv-81167-MFU-RSB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000016526]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-7245]
Appeal: 16-7245
Doc: 8
Filed: 02/03/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7245
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EVERETT CORNELIUS KAYMORE, a/k/a CO, a/k/a Everet Cornelius
Kaymore,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg.
Michael F. Urbanski,
District Judge.
(5:10-cr-00016-MFU-RSB-1; 5:16-cv-81164-MFURSB; 5:16-cv-81167-MFU-RSB)
Submitted:
January 31, 2017
Decided:
February 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Everett Cornelius Kaymore, Appellant Pro Se.
John Palmer
Fishwick, Jr., United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Jeb
Thomas Terrien, Assistant United States Attorney, Harrisonburg,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7245
Doc: 8
Filed: 02/03/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Everett
Cornelius
Kaymore
seeks
to
appeal
the
district
court’s orders denying as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012)
motions, and the order denying his motion to reconsider.
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
Kaymore has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
2
the
facts
and
We
legal
Appeal: 16-7245
Doc: 8
contentions
Filed: 02/03/2017
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?