Zonta Ellison v. US, No. 20-6765 (4th Cir. 2020)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6765 ZONTA TAVARUS ELLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:19-cv-00441-FDW) Submitted: October 20, 2020 Decided: October 23, 2020 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DIAZ, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Zonta Tavarus Ellison, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Zonta Tavarus Ellison seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition and subsequent motion for stay as 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions and dismissing them as successive and unauthorized. The orders are 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, as here, 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 Ellison 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

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.