United States v. Gregory Crum
United States v. Gregory Crum
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7194
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GREGORY CRUM,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:16-cr-00133-1; 2:19-cv- 00817)
Submitted: November 23, 2021 Decided: November 30, 2021
Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gregory Crum, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Gregory Crum seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Crum’s
28 U.S.C. § 2255motion. 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). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this
standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment
of the constitutional claims 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 Crum 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- Unpublished