Court Opinion

ID: 4198039
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-08-22 19:01:42.671517+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:30.812284
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                       No. 17-6535

JAMARA WASHINGTON,

                     Petitioner - Appellant,

              v.

LARRY DAIL,

                     Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:15-hc-02169-FL)

Submitted: August 17, 2017                                        Decided: August 22, 2017

Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamara Washington, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholaos George Vlahos, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Jamara Washington seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition and denying his motions for reconsideration. The

orders are 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 Washington 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 presented in the

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                               DISMISSED

                                             2