Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07558/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07558-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rodney Oneal Braxton
Appellant
Harold Clarke
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7558

RODNEY ONEAL BRAXTON, 

Petitioner - Appellant, 

v. 

HAROLD CLARKE, 

Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior 

District Judge. (1:15-cv-01128-JCC-TCB) 

Submitted: January 14, 2016 Decided: January 20, 2016

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Rodney Oneal Braxton, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

Appeal: 15-7558 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM: 

Rodney Oneal Braxton seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition. The order is not appealable 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.” 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 

Braxton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny Braxton’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 

Appeal: 15-7558 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-7558 Doc: 13 Filed: 01/20/2016 Pg: 3 of 3