Moses Faison v. State of North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:10-hc-02264-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998786509]. Mailed to: Moses Faison. [11-7081]

Appeal: 11-7081

Document: 10

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7081

MOSES LEON FAISON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:10-hc-02264-D)

Submitted:

February 9, 2012

Decided:

February 13, 2012

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Moses Leon Faison, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7081

Document: 10

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Moses Leon Faison seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

untimely filed.

his

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254

(2006)

petition

as

The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).

See 28

A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.”

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

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 Faison 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: 11-7081

before

Document: 10

the

court

Date Filed: 02/13/2012

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3