Case ID: f-appx_547/html/0228-02.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

Kenneth NEWKIRK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louis LERNER, Judge, Hampton VA Circuit Court, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 13-7500.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Nov. 21, 2013.
    Decided: Nov. 26, 2013.
    Kenneth H. Newkirk, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Newkirk seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. 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 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 v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Newkirk has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Newkirk’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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.