Dean Gamble, Sr. v. Adrian Hoke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998742466-2] Originating case number: 2:10-cv-00690 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998823330]. Mailed to: Dean Gamble, Sr.. [11-7327]

Appeal: 11-7327

Document: 20

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7327
DEAN E. GAMBLE, SR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ADRIAN HOKE, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston.
Thomas E. Johnston,
District Judge. (2:10-cv-00690)
Submitted:

March 29, 2012

Decided:

April 2, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dean E. Gamble, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Robert David Goldberg,
Assistant Attorney General, Silas B. Taylor, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7327

Document: 20

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Dean
court’s
judge

order

and

petition.
or

judge

E.

Gamble,

accepting

denying

the

relief

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

on

his

28

of

U.S.C.

the

the
§

district

magistrate

2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

Sr.,

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.
484 (2000);
(2003).

see

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 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 Gamble has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2

Appeal: 11-7327

Document: 20

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

Page: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3