Andrew White v. Duane Terrell ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-6842
    ANDREW DAVID WHITE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    DUANE TERRELL,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
    Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00122-JAB-LPA)
    Submitted:   August 28, 2014                 Decided:   September 3, 2014
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Andrew David White, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge,
    III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Andrew      David     White     seeks     to    appeal       the     district
    court’s    order     accepting       the    recommendation         of    the     magistrate
    judge and dismissing as untimely White’s 
    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 White has not made the requisite showing.                           Accordingly, we
    deny White’s motion for 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
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-6842

Filed Date: 9/3/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021