Donnell Morris v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:10-cv-00355-RAJ-FBS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998796884]. Mailed to: Morris. [11-7333]

Appeal: 11-7333

Document: 12

Date Filed: 02/27/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7333

DONNELL JOSEPH MORRIS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:10-cv-00355-RAJ-FBS)

Submitted:

February 23, 2012

Decided:

February 27, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donnell Joseph Morris, Appellant Pro Se.
Benjamin Hyman Katz,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7333

Document: 12

Date Filed: 02/27/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Donnell
court’s

order

petition.

Joseph

denying

Morris

relief

seeks

on

to

his

28

appeal
U.S.C.

district

§ 2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

the

absent

“a

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

See 28 U.S.C.

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 Morris 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: 11-7333

before

Document: 12

the

court

Date Filed: 02/27/2012

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3