Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07870/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07870-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Antonio Lamont Allison
Appellant
Gregory Holloway
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7870

ANTONIO LAMONT ALLISON,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

GREGORY HOLLOWAY,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney Jr., District 

Judge. (3:13-cv-00824-JAG)

Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015

Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antonio Lamont Allison, Appellant Pro Se. Leah A. Darron, OFFICE 

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7870 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/17/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Lamont Allison seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as untimely 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 

Allison has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

Appeal: 14-7870 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/17/2015 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: 14-7870 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/17/2015 Pg: 3 of 3