Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07452/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07452-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Ballard
Appellee
Cedeal T. Harper
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7452

CEDEAL T. HARPER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

DAVID BALLARD, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers,

Chief District Judge. (3:13-cv-23467)

Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: January 27, 2015

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cedeal T. Harper, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher S. Dodrill, 

Scott E. Johnson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Charleston, 

West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7452 Doc: 19 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Cedeal T. Harper 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 Harper has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny Harper’s motions for a certificate of appealability, for 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and for bail, and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

Appeal: 14-7452 Doc: 19 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7452 Doc: 19 Filed: 01/27/2015 Pg: 3 of 3