Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06251/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06251-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kenneth Roshaun Reid
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6251

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

KENNETH ROSHAUN REID, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior 

District Judge. (0:04-cr-00353-CMC-1) 

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 21, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Kenneth Roshaun Reid, Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Jimmie 

Ewing, William Kenneth Witherspoon, Assistant United States 

Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

Appeal: 15-6251 Doc: 6 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM: 

Kenneth Roshaun Reid seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive 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 

Reid has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

 * Reid filed a self-styled motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(2) (2012) and for a certificate of appealability in 

which he challenged the propriety of some of his convictions and 

the legality of his sentence. The district court construed 

Reid’s motion as a motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

Appeal: 15-6251 Doc: 6 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-6251 Doc: 6 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 3 of 3