Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07024/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07024-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Earnest Jermaine Young
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7024

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

EARNEST JERMAINE YOUNG,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (6:07-cr-00833-HMH-1; 6:16-cv-01483-HMH)

Submitted: December 30, 2016 Decided: January 10, 2017

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Earnest Jermaine Young, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Lance Crick, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Earnest Jermaine Young seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order 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, 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: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-7024 Doc: 9 Filed: 01/10/2017 Pg: 3 of 3