United States v. Kenneth Davis
United States v. Kenneth Davis
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-7477
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENNETH LOUIS DAVIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:02-cr-00552-LMB-1; 1:16-cv-00633- LMB)
Submitted: December 17, 2019 Decided: December 20, 2019
Before KING, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kenneth Louis Davis, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Louis Davis 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. See
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. See Buck v. Davis,
137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74(2017). 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. Gonzalez v. Thaler,
565 U.S. 134, 140-41(2012) (citing Slack v.
McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 484(2000)).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Davis 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
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished