United States of America v. Gerard Oneil Wells, a/k/a J

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7044
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GERARD ONEIL WELLS, a/k/a J,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (0:08-cr-00608-JFA-2; 0:15-cv-01303-JFA)
Submitted: November 17, 2015 Decided: November 20, 2015
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerard Oneil Wells, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Frank Daley, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Gerard Oneil Wells 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. 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
Wells has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

-- 2 of 3 --

3
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --