Court Opinion

ID: 617770
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-11-23 19:43:29+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:50:42.351234
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 11-6985

CHRIS GOOCH,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

ALVIN W. KELLER,     JR.,   Secretary    of   the    Department   of
Correction,

                Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (5:10-hc-02164-FL)

Submitted:   November 10, 2011            Decided:    November 23, 2011

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chris Gooch, Appellant Pro Se.    Clarence Joe          DelForge, III,
Assistant  Attorney  General, Raleigh,   North          Carolina,  for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Chris Gooch seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 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) (2006).            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) (2006).              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    Gooch    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

                                           2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED

                                    3