Court Opinion

ID: 4034021
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-15 19:01:10.515339+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:12.979482
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 16-6709

MORRIS J. WARREN,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

LOUIS W. WINN, JR., Warden,

                Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00935-JCC-JFA)

Submitted:   September 13, 2016          Decided:   September 15, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Morris J. Warren, Appellant Pro Se. David Moskowitz, Assistant
United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Morris    J.      Warren,    a     District       of    Columbia         Code   Offender

incarcerated at FCI Petersburg, seeks to appeal the district

court’s    order      denying      relief      on    his      28    U.S.C.      § 2241     (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

Warren 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

                                               2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                      DISMISSED

                                  3