Dennis Patton v. Alvin Keller

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-00280-MR Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998694145]. Mailed to: Patton. [11-6609]

Appeal: 11-6609

Document: 6

Date Filed: 10/05/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6609

DENNIS PATTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ALVIN W. KELLER, Secretary, N.C. Department of Correction;
VANESA GILBERT, Captain, Henderson County Jail,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00280-MR)

Submitted:

September 29, 2011

Decided:

October 5, 2011

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dennis Patton, Appellant Pro Se.
Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant
Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6609

Document: 6

Date Filed: 10/05/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Dennis

Patton

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

absent

“a

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

See

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

of

a

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

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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Patton 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

Appeal: 11-6609

before

Document: 6

Date Filed: 10/05/2011

the

and

court

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3