Timothy Boyd v. Harold Clarke , 548 F. App'x 900 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-7300
    TIMOTHY BOYD,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of
    Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.    Mark S. Davis, District
    Judge. (2:12-cv-00462-MSD-DEM)
    Submitted:   December 17, 2013            Decided:   December 20, 2013
    Before KING, GREGORY, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Timothy Boyd, Appellant Pro Se.     Steven Andrew Witmer, Senior
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Timothy      Boyd   seeks    to    appeal     the     district    court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on 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 Boyd 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: 18-168

Citation Numbers: 548 F. App'x 900

Judges: King, Gregory, Wynn

Filed Date: 12/20/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024