Joe Brown, Jr. v. Dennis Daniels , 540 F. App'x 197 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-6795
    JOE LOUIS BROWN, JR.,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    DENNIS DANIELS,
    Respondent – Appellee,
    and
    ROBERT LEWIS,
    Respondent.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   Terrence W. Boyle,
    District Judge. (5:12-hc-02145-BO)
    Submitted:   September 24, 2013         Decided:   September 27, 2013
    Before NIEMEYER and     THACKER,    Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Joe Louis    Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis,
    Assistant    Attorney  General, Raleigh, North  Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Joe Louis Brown, Jr., seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order dismissing as untimely 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 Brown has not made the requisite showing.                            Accordingly,
    although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny a
    certificate      of      appealability        and     dismiss    the     appeal.        We
    dispense      with       oral     argument    because     the     facts    and      legal
    3
    contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-6795

Citation Numbers: 540 F. App'x 197

Judges: Hamilton, Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Thacker

Filed Date: 9/27/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023