Court Opinion

ID: 2830436
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-08-25 19:01:03.498363+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:16.259725
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 15-6827

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                 Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

JERRY JOHNSON,

                 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.     Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge.    (1:07-cr-00104-IMK-JSK-5; 1:14-cv-00091-IMK-
JSK)

Submitted:   August 20, 2015                 Decided:   August 25, 2015

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.    Michael D. Stein, Assistant
United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, Zelda Elizabeth
Wesley, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Jerry Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

accepting       the      recommendation     of      the   magistrate       judge        and

dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive.

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

Johnson 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

                                            2
contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                               DISMISSED

                                   3