Court Opinion

ID: 2797002
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-04-28 19:00:52.658915+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:41.545430
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 15-6253

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

TYREE LAMAR SLADE, a/k/a Ovious Mcfly,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Abingdon.    James P. Jones, District
Judge. (1:08-cr-00024-JPJ-5; 1:11-cv-80571-JPJ-RSB)

Submitted:   April 23, 2015                 Decided:   April 28, 2015

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyree Lamar Slade, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer R. Bockhorst,
Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Tyree     Lamar       Slade    seeks     to    appeal     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

Slade 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