Solomon Butler v. Dennis Daniels ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 20-6215
    SOLOMON NIMROD BUTLER,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    DENNIS DANIELS,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
    Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02305-D)
    Submitted: August 20, 2020                                   Decided: September 8, 2020
    Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Solomon Nimrod Butler, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Solomon Nimrod Butler seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on
    his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     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). 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 petition 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 record and conclude that Butler has not made
    the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
    appeal. We deny Butler’s motions to expedite and for summary disposition as moot. 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-6215

Filed Date: 9/8/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 9/22/2020