Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07007/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07007-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph Terrell Briscoe
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOSEPH TERRELL BRISCOE, a/k/a Dreads,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, 

District Judge. (3:07-cr-00065-JPB-JES-1; 3:14-cv-00127-JPBJES)

Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 17, 2015

Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Terrell Briscoe, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas 

Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West 

Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7007 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Terrell Briscoe seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying as untimely 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 

Briscoe 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: 15-7007 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/17/2015 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: 15-7007 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 3 of 3