Court Opinion

ID: 9962850
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-23 21:00:55.434021+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:20:16.733128
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7279      Doc: 5         Filed: 04/22/2024    Pg: 1 of 3

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-7279

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        ANTHONY JACKSON, a/k/a Loc,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:22-cr-00039-BO-1; 7:23-cv-01233-
        BO)

        Submitted: April 18, 2024                                           Decided: April 22, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Anthony Jackson, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7279      Doc: 5         Filed: 04/22/2024      Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Anthony Jackson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28

        U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order 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 Jackson has not made

        the requisite showing. The district court correctly concluded that Jackson’s claim that

        counsel was ineffective for advising him that he could plead guilty despite the appellate

        waiver in the plea was belied by the record as Jackson was advised of the waiver at the

        Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing and agreed that he understood its terms. Therefore, Jackson

        failed to demonstrate that counsel rendered ineffective assistance.

               Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We

        dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7279     Doc: 5       Filed: 04/22/2024    Pg: 3 of 3

        presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

        process.

                                                                                 DISMISSED

                                                  3