675 Fed.Appx. 352 (4th Cir. 2017), 16-7255, United States v. Gardner

Docket Nº:16-7255
Citation:675 Fed.Appx. 352
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM
Party Name:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DUSHAWN LEVERT GARDNER, a/k/a Michael Archer, a/k/a Black, a/k/a Shawn, Defendant - Appellant
Attorney:Dushawn Levert Gardner, Appellant, Pro se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Judge Panel:Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:February 03, 2017
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 352

675 Fed.Appx. 352 (4th Cir. 2017)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DUSHAWN LEVERT GARDNER, a/k/a Michael Archer, a/k/a Black, a/k/a Shawn, Defendant - Appellant

No. 16-7255

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

February 3, 2017

Submitted January 31, 2017

UNPUBLISHED

Editorial Note:

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.(See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. (4:95-cr-00041-H-5; 4:16-cv-00176-H). Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge.

Dushawn Levert Gardner, Appellant, Pro se.

Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Dushawn Levert Gardner seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as successive 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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.

Page 353

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gardner 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 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP