Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Elan Lewis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Elan Lewis's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his motion to file a supplemental or amended pleading to his §2255 motion. The district court had dismissed the motion as an impermissible successive §2255 motion. The appellate court denied a certificate of appealability, finding that Lewis did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or procedural ruling. The court independently reviewed the record and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-07-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6627

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Elan Lewis's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his motion to file a supplemental or amended pleading to his §2255 motion. The district court had dismissed the motion as an impermissible successive §2255 motion. The appellate court denied a certificate of appealability, finding that Lewis did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or procedural ruling. The court independently reviewed the record and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views3 pages

    United States v. Elan Lewis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Elan Lewis's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his motion to file a supplemental or amended pleading to his §2255 motion. The district court had dismissed the motion as an impermissible successive §2255 motion. The appellate court denied a certificate of appealability, finding that Lewis did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or procedural ruling. The court independently reviewed the record and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6627

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ELAN CHRISTOPHER LEWIS, a/k/a Jamal Xavier Harris,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    John A. Gibney, Jr.,
    District Judge. (3:94-cr-00094-JAG-1; 3:13-cv-00410-JAG)

    Submitted:

    July 24, 2014

    Before FLOYD and


    Circuit Judge.

    THACKER,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    Judges,

    and

    July 29, 2014

    DAVIS,

    Senior

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Elan Christopher Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. David Thomas Maguire,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Elan Christopher Lewis seeks to appeal the district
    courts

    orders

    dismissing

    his

    Motion

    for

    Leave

    to

    File

    Relation Back Amendment and/or Supplemental Pleading as a


    successive

    28

    U.S.C.

    2255

    (2012)

    motion

    subsequent Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.


    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    certificate of appealability.
    A

    certificate

    of

    justice

    and

    denying

    his

    The orders are not


    or

    judge

    issues

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

    appealability

    will

    not

    issue

    absent

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).
    relief

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district

    merits,
    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    When the district court denies

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    Slack

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    of

    the

    v.

    McDaniel,

    standard

    find

    constitutional
    529

    U.S.

    by

    that

    the

    claims

    is

    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

    claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    debatable

    Slack, 529 U.S.

    at 484-85.
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Lewis has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    2

    We

    dispense

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like