Eugene Matthews v. Keith Whitener ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-7168
    EUGENE MATTHEWS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    KEITH WHITENER, Administrator,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.   Robert J. Conrad,
    Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cv-00543-RJC)
    Submitted:   October 16, 2013             Decided:   November 6, 2013
    Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Eugene Matthews, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Eugene Matthews seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order    dismissing       as     untimely    his       
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
         (2006)
    petition.      The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
    or    judge   issues      a    certificate      of   appealability.             
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)(A) (2006).            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) (2006).                  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 Matthews 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: 13-7168

Judges: Duncan, Davis, Floyd

Filed Date: 11/6/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024