Lucian Oprea v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00920-TSE-JFA. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998744635]. Mailed to: Lucian Oprea. [11-6854]

Appeal: 11-6854

Document: 16

Date Filed: 12/15/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6854

LUCIAN OPREA,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T.S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00920-TSE-JFA)

Submitted:

December 6, 2011

Decided:

December 15, 2011

Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lucian Oprea, Appellant Pro Se.
Craig Stallard,
Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Assistant

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6854

Document: 16

Date Filed: 12/15/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Lucian

Oprea

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

constitutional

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

right.”

See

28

showing
U.S.C.

of

the

denial

§ 2253(c)(2).

of

When

a
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
Oprea

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: 11-6854

before

Document: 16

the

court

Date Filed: 12/15/2011

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3