Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07975/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07975-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Wasim Ata Bey
Appellant
John R. Kyplinski
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7975

WASIM ATA BEY, Erick Sealey,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

JOHN R. KYPLINSKI, Superintendent, Virginia Peninsula 

Regional Jail,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson,

District Judge. (4:15-cv-00070-RAJ-LRL)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wasim Ata Bey, Appellant Pro Se. John Chadwick Johnson, FRITH, 

ANDERSON & PEAKE, PC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7975 Doc: 13 Filed: 05/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Wasim Ata Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing 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 

Bey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability, deny Bey’s motion to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

Appeal: 15-7975 Doc: 13 Filed: 05/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-7975 Doc: 13 Filed: 05/20/2016 Pg: 3 of 3