Case ID: f-appx_224/html/0291-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Larry MCLEOD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Superintendent, J.J. CLARK, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 06-8039.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 19, 2007.
    Decided: April 24, 2007.
    
      Larry McLeod, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

On May 29, 2003, this court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed Larry McLeod’s appeal of a district court order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. See McLeod v. Clark, 63 Fed. Appx. 773 (4th Cir.2003) (unpublished). Over three years after the issuance of our opinion, McLeod filed a notice of appeal in the district court and a motion for a certificate of appealability in this court.

To the extent McLeod seeks a certificate of appealability, the court has previously considered this request and denied it. Accordingly, we decline to consider the request, as it is duplicative, and we deny it on that basis. Even if we were to entertain the motion, we would lack jurisdiction over McLeod’s appeal because it is clearly untimely. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a). Accordingly, we deny leave for McLeod to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Pardee, 356 F.2d 982 (4th Cir.1966) (“The proliferation of notices of appeal is to be discouraged.”). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.