Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06738/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06738-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Charles Lee Torian
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6738

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

CHARLES LEE TORIAN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Danville. Norman K. Moon, Senior

District Judge. (4:01-cr-70057-NKM-1; 4:15-cv-80813-NKM-RSB)

Submitted: August 20, 2015 Decided: August 25, 2015

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Lee Torian, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6738 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Lee Torian seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order construing his motion to correct a clerical error as a 

successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and denying it on that 

basis. 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 

Torian 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: 15-6738 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/25/2015 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: 15-6738 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 3 of 3