United States v. Anthony Terry , 469 F. App'x 217 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-7514
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ANTHONY DWAYNE TERRY,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (1:03-cr-00012-JCC-1; 1:11-cv-01044-JCC)
    Submitted:   March 15, 2012                 Decided:   March 19, 2012
    Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Anthony Dwayne Terry, Appellant Pro Se.       Patrick Friel Stokes,
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,          Washington, DC, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony      Dwayne    Terry       seeks       to    appeal        the    district
    court’s     order      dismissing      as        untimely          and     unauthorized          his
    successive 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
     (West Supp. 2011) 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)
    (2006).     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) (2006).                    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 Terry has not made the requisite showing.                                Accordingly, we
    deny    Terry’s       motion    for   a   certificate              of    appealability           and
    dismiss the appeal.            We dispense with oral argument because the
    facts    and    legal       contentions     are     adequately           presented         in    the
    2
    materials   before   the   court   and   argument   would   not    aid   the
    decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-7514

Citation Numbers: 469 F. App'x 217

Filed Date: 3/19/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/22/2014