Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07083/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07083-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7083

JACQUES CRAIG FLOYD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BOB JONES; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III,

Chief District Judge. (5:13-hc-02163-D)

Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jacques Craig Floyd, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, 

III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7083 Doc: 15 Filed: 10/20/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Jacques Craig Floyd seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition

and his motion for reconsideration. The orders are not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 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.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). 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 

Floyd has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

Floyd’s motion for 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 

Appeal: 15-7083 Doc: 15 Filed: 10/20/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-7083 Doc: 15 Filed: 10/20/2015 Pg: 3 of 3