United States of America v. Jermaine Jerrell Sims, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7164
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JERMAINE JERRELL SIMS, a/k/a Justice, a/k/a Jus,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (3:98-cr-00045-CMH-1)
Submitted: November 13, 2008 Decided: November 20, 2008
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jermaine Jerrell Sims, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan
Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond,
Virginia, Kenneth E. Melson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jermaine Jerrell Sims seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying relief on his Motion for Independent
Action for Relief from Judgment. The order is not appealable
unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of
appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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)
(2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating
that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the
constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or
wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district
court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S.
322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);
Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sims 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 the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --