Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07902/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07902-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Tillman
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7897

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMERSON DEVOIR TILLMAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-7902

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES TILLMAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District 

of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District 

Judge. (8:00-cr-00137-DKC-1; 8:14-cv-03314-DKC; 8:00-cr-00137-

DKC-2; 8:14-cv-03315-DKC)

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

Appeal: 14-7902 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 4
2

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

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamerson Devoir Tillman and James Tillman, Appellants Pro Se. 

Michael Thomas Packard, Assistant United States Attorney, 

Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7902 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 4
3

PER CURIAM:

Jamerson Devoir Tillman and James Tillman seek to appeal 

from the district court’s orders dismissing their 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 (2012) motions as successive. 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 records and conclude 

that the Tillmans have not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss 

the appeals. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

Appeal: 14-7902 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 3 of 4
4

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7902 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/21/2015 Pg: 4 of 4