Fourth Circuit Dismisses § 2254 Appeal
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsFourth Circuit Dismisses § 2254 Appeal
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7754
DONNIE GEORGE MORTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
FRANK L. PERRY,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00319-CCE-LPA)
Submitted:
May 24, 2016
Decided:
May 27, 2016
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donnie George Morton, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, Nicholaos George Vlahos, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donnie George Morton seeks to appeal the district courts
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2012) petition.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues
certificate
2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue
absent
of
appealability.
U.S.C.
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.
28
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
Morton has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
Mortons motion for 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
