Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07756/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07756-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jamad Ali
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7756

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMAD ALI, a/k/a Supe, a/k/a Jacquae Taylor, a/k/a Marvin 

George,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

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

District Judge. (6:10-cr-00296-HMH-1; 6:15-cv-04107-HMH)

Submitted: March 29, 2016 Decided: April 1, 2016

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamad Ali, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Frank Daley, Jr., Jimmie 

Ewing, Stanley D. Ragsdale, Assistant United States Attorneys, 

Columbia, South Carolina; Carrie Fisher Sherard, Assistant United 

States Attorney, Andrew Burke Moorman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7756 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/01/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Jamad Ali seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing as untimely 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 

Ali 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 contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-7756 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/01/2016 Pg: 2 of 2