Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06695/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06695-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jackie Emmitt Moorehead
Appellant
State of North Carolina
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6695

JACKIE EMMITT MOOREHEAD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, 

Chief District Judge. (5:15-hc-02092-D)

Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: October 20, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jackie Emmitt Moorehead, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6695 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Jackie Emmitt Moorehead seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 

judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as

time-barred. 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 

Moorehead has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny 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 contentions are adequately 

Appeal: 16-6695 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6695 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/20/2016 Pg: 3 of 3