US v. Tahji Eley, No. 20-7846 (4th Cir. 2021)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-7846 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TAHJI ANTONIO ELEY, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7850 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL EMANUEL PRYOR, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7852 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. STANLEY ANDREA CLYBURN, JR., a/k/a Drea, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7853 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BOBBY RAY LAMBERT, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7854 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RONNIE DONTE RAND, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7856 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2 Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER DAVID FRAZIER, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7858 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. AHMAD LEE BANKS, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7865 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHNNY DRAUGHN, Defendant - Appellant. No. 20-7869 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHANIQUA SHONTA BURRELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Courts for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh and Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:10-cr-00196-FL-3; 5:16-cv-00480-FL; 5:11-cr-00279-FL-4; 5:16-cv-00796-FL; 7:10-cr-00036-FL-1; 7:16cv-00135-FL; 7:09-cr-00057-FL-1; 7:16-cv-00175-FL; 5:08-cr-00329-FL-3; 5:16-cv00476-FL; 7:11-cr-00038-FL-1; 5:08-cr-00329-FL-1; 5:16-cv-00321-FL; 5:09-cr-00201FL-2; 5:16-cv-00487-FL; 5:10-cr-00196-FL-2 ) Submitted: April 22, 2021 Decided: April 27, 2021 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric Joseph Brignac, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellants. Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 4 PER CURIAM: Appellants seek to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on their 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions. 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 the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 (2017). 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. 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 records and conclude that Appellants have not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny their motions for certificates of appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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 5

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.