Juan Partida-Rodriguez v. Frank Perry, 4th Cir. (2015)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsJuan Partida-Rodriguez v. Frank Perry, 4th Cir. (2015)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7721
JUAN ANTONIO PARTIDA-RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner Appellant,
v.
FRANK PERRY,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-00408-FDW)
Submitted:
April 16, 2015
Decided:
April 20, 2015
Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Juan Antonio Partida-Rodriguez, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Juan Antonio Partida-Rodriguez seeks to appeal the district
courts
order
petition.
or
judge
denying
relief
his
28
U.S.C.
2254
(2012)
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues
certificate
2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue
on
absent
appealability.
28
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.
of
showing
of
the
denial
28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).
of
When the
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this
standard
by
demonstrating
that
reasonable
jurists
would
find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484
Cockrell,
(2000);
(2003).
see
Miller-El
v.
537
U.S.
322,
336-38
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
Partida-Rodriguez
has
not
made
the
requisite
showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave
to
proceed
dispense
in
with
forma
pauperis,
oral
argument
and
dismiss
because
the
the
appeal.
facts
and
We
legal
contentions
are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
