Akbar v. Padula , 404 F. App'x 733 ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7266
BASIL AKBAR,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ANTHONY J. PADULA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. David C. Norton, Chief District
Judge. (0:09-cv-02338-DCN)
Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 7, 2010
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Basil Akbar, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Basil Akbar seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying his motion for a certificate of appealability. The
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (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 Akbar 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
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3