United States v. Milton Gonzalez , 673 F. App'x 326 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-6580
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MILTON ANTONIO GONZALEZ, a/k/a Milton Antonio Gonzalez-
    Rodriguez, a/k/a Peres Aguilarjose, a/k/a Jose Lopez,
    Defendant – Appellant.
    No. 16-7031
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MILTON ANTONIO GONZALEZ, a/k/a Milton Antonio Gonzalez-
    Rodriguez, a/k/a Peres Aguilarjose, a/k/a Jose Lopez,
    Defendant – Appellant.
    Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
    (8:09-cr-00302-RWT-1; 8:15-cv-02501-RWT)
    Submitted:   December 16, 2016            Decided:   January 18, 2017
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit
    Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Milton Antonio Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Lynn Dwyer,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Milton Antonio Gonzalez seeks to appeal the district court’s
    orders in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) proceeding, which dismissed
    as untimely his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and
    denied relief on the challenge to his sentence pursuant to Johnson
    v. United States, 
    135 S. Ct. 2551
    (2015).       A prisoner may not
    appeal a district court’s ruling in a § 2255 action 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
    Gonzalez has not made the requisite showing as to either the
    ineffective assistance claims or the Johnson claim.   Accordingly,
    3
    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals.
    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.
    DISMISSED
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-6580

Citation Numbers: 673 F. App'x 326

Filed Date: 1/18/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023