Case ID: f-appx_596/html/0243-01.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

Mark Anthony BARNES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold W. CLARKE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 14-7166.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 29, 2015.
    Decided: March 9, 2015.
    Mark Anthony Barnes, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Mark Anthony Barnes seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing .without prejudice his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. This order is not appeal-able 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.” Id. § 2253(c)(2). When a district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating “that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 478, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). When a district court denies relief on procedural grounds, a prisoner must demonstrate that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Id. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Barnes has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, deny a certifícate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We deny Barnes’s “motion to excuse time bar” and 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.