John Pate v. Roy Cooper ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-7341
    JOHN E. PATE,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    ROY COOPER,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Asheville.   Frank D. Whitney,
    Chief District Judge. (1:16-cv-00086-FDW)
    Submitted:    December 15, 2016            Decided:   December 20, 2016
    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John E. Pate, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    John E. Pate seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    dismissing his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2012) petition.                           The order is
    not   appealable        unless    a   circuit      justice     or    judge    issues    a
    certificate      of    appealability.           See    
    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
    Pate has not made the requisite showing.                      Accordingly, we deny
    leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Pate’s motions for a
    certificate of appealability and to appoint counsel, and dismiss
    the appeal.         We dispense with oral argument because the facts
    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
    2
    before   this   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional
    process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-7341

Judges: Shedd, Duncan, Agee

Filed Date: 12/20/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024