Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06778/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06778-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Douglas Glenn Grigsby
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6778

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DOUGLAS GLENN GRIGSBY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, 

Chief District Judge. (4:08-cr-00109-RBS-FBS-1)

Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 21, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas Glenn Grigsby, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Rae McKeel, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6778 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/21/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Douglas Glenn Grigsby seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order construing his motion to recall the mandate as a 

successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and 

dismissing 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 

Grigsby 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 

Appeal: 16-6778 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/21/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6778 Doc: 13 Filed: 10/21/2016 Pg: 3 of 3