Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07689/USCOURTS-ca4-16-07689-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Hubert Corpening
Appellee
Robert W. Johnson
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7689

ROBERT WAYNE JOHNSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HUBERT CORPENING, Superintendent, Marion Correctional 

Institution,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Frank D. Whitney,

Chief District Judge. (5:16-cv-00074-FDW)

Submitted: March 7, 2017 Decided: March 13, 2017

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert W. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7689 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/13/2017 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Wayne Johnson 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 

Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, deny Johnson’s motion to appoint counsel, and 

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

Appeal: 16-7689 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/13/2017 Pg: 2 of 3
3

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-7689 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/13/2017 Pg: 3 of 3