Ralph Wilkins v. John Wolfe , 585 F. App'x 12 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-6847
    RALPH EDWARD WILKINS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    JOHN WOLFE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
    (8:14-cv-01353-RWT)
    Submitted:   October 16, 2014             Decided:   October 20, 2014
    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ralph Edward Wilkins, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ralph        Edward   Wilkins       seeks   to        appeal    the    district
    court’s    order     denying      relief   on    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 Wilkins has not made the requisite showing.                            Accordingly,
    we deny a certificate of appealability 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: 14-6847

Citation Numbers: 585 F. App'x 12

Filed Date: 10/20/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023