From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Simon

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 2, 2018
No. 17-7311 (4th Cir. May. 2, 2018)

Opinion

No. 17-7311 No. 17-7457

05-02-2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOVAN CORNELIUS SIMON, Defendant - Appellant.

Jovan Cornelius Simon, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:12-cr-00742-RBH-1; 4:16-cv-03282-RBH) Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jovan Cornelius Simon, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Jovan Cornelius Simon seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The orders are 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 (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 Simon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Simon's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Simon's motions for appointment of counsel and preparation of a transcript at government expense. 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


Summaries of

United States v. Simon

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 2, 2018
No. 17-7311 (4th Cir. May. 2, 2018)
Case details for

United States v. Simon

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOVAN CORNELIUS SIMON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 2, 2018

Citations

No. 17-7311 (4th Cir. May. 2, 2018)