Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06827/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06827-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jerry Johnson
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6827

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JERRY JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, 

District Judge. (1:07-cr-00104-IMK-JSK-5; 1:14-cv-00091-IMKJSK)

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

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Michael D. Stein, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, Zelda Elizabeth 

Wesley, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West 

Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6827 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

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

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

Johnson 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: 15-6827 Doc: 8 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: 15-6827 Doc: 8 Filed: 08/25/2015 Pg: 3 of 3