Joshua Blair v. Virginia DOC , 700 F. App'x 298 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-6682
    JOSHUA D. BLAIR,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    VIRGINIA DOC,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
    Richmond. Roderick Charles Young, Magistrate Judge. (3:16-cv-00934-RCY)
    Submitted: October 17, 2017                                   Decided: October 19, 2017
    Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Joshua D. Blair, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Thomas Judge, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Joshua D. Blair seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order dismissing as
    untimely his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2012) 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)
    (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 Blair 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 presented in the materials before
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    *
    This case was decided by a magistrate judge with the parties’ consent pursuant to
    
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (c) (2012).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-6682

Citation Numbers: 700 F. App'x 298

Filed Date: 10/19/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023