Floyd Hunt, Jr. v. Rick White ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • USCA4 Appeal: 22-7342      Doc: 14         Filed: 05/23/2023    Pg: 1 of 2
    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 22-7342
    FLOYD O. HUNT, JR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    RICK WHITE,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
    Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:21-cv-00534-JPJ-PMS)
    Submitted: May 18, 2023                                           Decided: May 23, 2023
    Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    USCA4 Appeal: 22-7342      Doc: 14          Filed: 05/23/2023     Pg: 2 of 2
    PER CURIAM:
    Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing as untimely
    his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     petition and denying his motion for reconsideration. See Gonzalez v.
    Thaler, 
    565 U.S. 134
    , 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to
    one-year statute of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates
    enumerated in 
    28 U.S.C. § 2244
    (d)(1)). The orders are not appealable unless a circuit
    justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 
    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, as here, 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, 
    565 U.S. at
    140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    ,
    484 (2000)).
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hunt has not made
    the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Hunt’s motion for an evidentiary hearing,
    deny a certificate of appealability, 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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-7342

Filed Date: 5/23/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 5/24/2023