Court Opinion

ID: 9741666
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:00:22.159887+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:57:23.590627
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6881    Doc: 9         Filed: 08/25/2023   Pg: 1 of 4

                                           UNPUBLISHED

                             UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                 FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                             No. 22-6881

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                           Plaintiff - Appellee,

                    v.

        JAMES LATRON SUMTER, a/k/a T,

                           Defendant - Appellant.

                                             No. 22-6884

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                           Plaintiff - Appellee,

                    v.

        JAMES LATRON SUMTER, a/k/a T,

                           Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, Chief District Judge. (4:18-cr-00772-RBH-1; 4:21-cv-
        00079-RBH)

        Submitted: April 28, 2023                                   Decided: August 25, 2023
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6881      Doc: 9        Filed: 08/25/2023     Pg: 2 of 4

        Before GREGORY and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        No. 22-6881, dismissed; No. 22-6884, affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        James Latron Sumter, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                                    2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6881       Doc: 9          Filed: 08/25/2023    Pg: 3 of 4

        PER CURIAM:

               James Latron Sumter seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his

        28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion (No. 22-6881) and denying his postjudgment motion to dismiss

        the indictment (No. 22-6884). The denial of Sumter’s § 2255 motion is not appealable

        unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.

        § 2253(c)(1)(B). 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). When the district court

        denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that

        reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims

        debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 (2017). 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. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing

        Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

               We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sumter has not

        made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

        dismiss the appeal as to the district court’s denial of Sumter’s § 2255 motion. As to

        Sumter’s appeal of the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment, we have reviewed

        the district court’s decision and discern no reversible error. We therefore affirm that

        portion of the district court’s order.

                                                      3
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6881         Doc: 9    Filed: 08/25/2023   Pg: 4 of 4

              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.

                                                                    No. 22-6881, DISMISSED
                                                                    No. 22-6884, AFFIRMED

                                                  4