Myron Nunn v. Roy Cooper

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00164-CCE-LPA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998762826]. Mailed to: Nunn. [11-6841]

Appeal: 11-6841

Document: 6

Date Filed: 01/11/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6841

MYRON RODERICK NUNN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ROY COOPER,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00164-CCE-LPA)

Submitted:

December 29, 2011

Before NIEMEYER and
Senior Circuit Judge.

GREGORY,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

January 11, 2012

and

HAMILTON,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Myron Roderick Nunn, Appellant Pro Se.
Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6841

Document: 6

Date Filed: 01/11/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Myron
court’s

order

Roderick
accepting

Nunn
the

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

of

the
the

district
magistrate

judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)
petition.
or

judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

absent

“a

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) (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.
and

conclude

that

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record
Nunn

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: 11-6841

before

Document: 6

Date Filed: 01/11/2012

the

and

court

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED

3