US v. Tara Gist-Savage


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999972196-2] Originating case number: 3:14-cr-00145-FDW-DCK-1,3:16-cv-00101-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000049261]. Mailed to: T Gist-Savage. [16-7513]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7513 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/27/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7513 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TARA GIST-SAVAGE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:14-cr-00145-FDW-DCK-1; 3:16-cv-00101FDW) Submitted: March 20, 2017 Decided: March 27, 2017 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tara Gist-Savage, Appellant Pro Se. Jenny Grus Sugar, Assistant United States Attorney, Benjamin Bain-Creed, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7513 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/27/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Tara Gist-Savage seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. A certificate of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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 Gist-Savage has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 Appeal: 16-7513 Doc: 13 Filed: 03/27/2017 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?