Court Opinion

ID: 4181350
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-06-27 19:01:26.373481+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:16.685783
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                       No. 17-6281

DOMINIQUE LEE, a/k/a Anthony Lee,

                     Petitioner - Appellant,

              v.

LARRY THOMPSON, Superintendent of Tabor Correctional Institution,

                     Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:15-hc-02311-BO)

Submitted: June 22, 2017                                          Decided: June 27, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Dominique Lee seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition and his subsequent motion to alter or amend the judgment.

The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

appealability. See 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 Lee 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 before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

                                                                               DISMISSED

                                             2