Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07519/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07519-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Derrick Rayshawn Parks
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7519

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

DERRICK RAYSHAWN PARKS, a/k/a Bam, a/k/a Bam Parks, a/k/a 

Rayshawn Parks,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. 

Voorhees, District Judge. (5:05-cr-00257-RLV-DCK-2; 5:13-cv00012-RLV)

Submitted: January 15, 2015 Decided: January 21, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derrick Rayshawn Parks, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael 

Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Adam Christopher 

Morris, Thomas A. O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina; Gretchen C.F. Shappert, 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7519 Doc: 5 Filed: 01/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Derrick Rayshawn Parks seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on 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 Parks 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: 14-7519 Doc: 5 Filed: 01/21/2015 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: 14-7519 Doc: 5 Filed: 01/21/2015 Pg: 3 of 3