Court Opinion

ID: 9397290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-24 21:01:23.088655+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:23.316839
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7342      Doc: 14         Filed: 05/23/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                                No. 22-7342

        FLOYD O. HUNT, JR.,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        RICK WHITE,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
        Roanoke. James P. Jones, Senior District Judge. (7:21-cv-00534-JPJ-PMS)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                           Decided: May 23, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7342      Doc: 14          Filed: 05/23/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing as untimely

        his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying his motion for reconsideration. See Gonzalez v.

        Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to

        one-year statute of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates

        enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). The orders are not appealable unless a circuit

        justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 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). When, as here, 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. Gonzalez, 565 U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

        484 (2000)).

               We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hunt has not made

        the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Hunt’s motion for an evidentiary hearing,

        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 before this

        court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                        DISMISSED

                                                      2