Court Opinion

ID: 2830008
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-08-24 19:00:55.48001+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:14.017336
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 15-6307

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

TREADWAY LEVON MANNING,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.     Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (4:04-cv-00517-CMC; 4:97-cr-00323-CMC-1)

Submitted:   August 20, 2015                 Decided:   August 24, 2015

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Treadway Levon Manning, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker
Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Treadway Levon Manning seeks to appeal the district court’s

order     denying       his     Fed.     R.       Civ.    P.      60(b)     motion    for

reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on

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

Manning has not made the requisite showing.                            Accordingly, we

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of

appealability, and dismiss the appeal.                         We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

                                              2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                      DISMISSED

                                  3