Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07697/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07697-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7697

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LANCE D. YOUNG,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:05-cr-00063-FPS-1; 5:09-cv00116-FPS-JSK)

Submitted: April 23, 2015 Decided: April 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lance D. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Randolph John Bernard, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7697 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/27/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Lance D. Young seeks to appeal the district court’s orders

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and denying 

reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit 

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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). 

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 

Young 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 

Appeal: 14-7697 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/27/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7697 Doc: 10 Filed: 04/27/2015 Pg: 3 of 3