Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06341/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06341-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marvin Lamont Dorsey
Appellant
Bobby P. Shearin
Appellee
The Attorney General of the State of Maryland
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6341

MARVIN LAMONT DORSEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BOBBY P. SHEARIN, Warden; THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE 

OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. 

(1:12-cv-01243-JKB)

Submitted: September 28, 2015 Decided: October 9, 2015 

Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marvin Lamont Dorsey, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, 

for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6341 Doc: 21 Filed: 10/09/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Marvin Lamont Dorsey seeks to appeal the district court’s 

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

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

a certificate of appealability, deny as moot Dorsey’s 

application for 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 

Appeal: 15-6341 Doc: 21 Filed: 10/09/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-6341 Doc: 21 Filed: 10/09/2015 Pg: 3 of 3