Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06737/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06737-0/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UNPUBLISHED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. 16-6737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

KENNETH WAYNE MONROE, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior 

District Judge. (5:07-cr-00093-BR-1; 5:16-cv-00184-BR) 

Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 2, 2016

Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Kenneth Wayne Monroe, Appellant Pro Se. Jason Harris Cowley, 

Assistant United States Attorney, James J. Kurosad, OFFICE OF 

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

Appeal: 16-6737 Doc: 7 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM: 

Kenneth Wayne Monroe seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is 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 

Monroe has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny 

Monroe’s motion to expedite decision and dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

Appeal: 16-6737 Doc: 7 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6737 Doc: 7 Filed: 08/02/2016 Pg: 3 of 3