Eleazar Totten v. Keith Davis ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-7692
    ELEAZAR D. TOTTEN,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    KEITH DAVIS, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.    Claude M. Hilton, Senior
    District Judge. (1:14-cv-01358-CMH-IDD)
    Submitted:   March 20, 2015                 Decided:   April 2, 2015
    Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Eleazar D. Totten, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Eleazar     D.     Totten   seeks      to   appeal      the    district      court’s
    order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition without
    prejudice.       The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
    or    judge   issues      a    certificate        of   appealability.         28     U.S.C.
    § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 petition 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
    Totten 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
    presented in the materials before this court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-7692

Judges: Gregory, Harris, Davis

Filed Date: 4/2/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024