Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06462/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06462-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ricardo Abraham Gonzalez-Castro
Appellant
Bob W. Marshall
Appellee
Kieran J. Shanahan
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6462

RICARDO ABRAHAM GONZALEZ-CASTRO,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BOB W. MARSHALL; KIERAN J. SHANAHAN,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta Copeland 

Biggs, District Judge. (1:13-cv-01120-LCB-LPA)

Submitted: October 28, 2015 Decided: November 19, 2015

Before KING and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ricardo Abraham Gonzalez-Castro, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe 

DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6462 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/19/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Ricardo Abraham Gonzalez-Castro seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the 

magistrate judge and 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 

Gonzalez-Castro 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 contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

Appeal: 15-6462 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/19/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-6462 Doc: 8 Filed: 11/19/2015 Pg: 3 of 3