Joseph Tarleton v. Ricky Anderson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998795948-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998795469-2] Originating case number: 3:08-cv-00483-RJC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998893407]. Mailed to: Joseph Tarleton. [12-6215]
Appeal: 12-6215
Doc: 28
Filed: 07/12/2012
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6215
JOSEPH BRIAN TARLETON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
RICKY ANDERSON,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:08-cv-00483-RJC)
Submitted:
June 28, 2012
Decided:
July 12, 2012
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Brian Tarleton, Appellant Pro Se.
Mary Carla Hollis,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Raleigh,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-6215
Doc: 28
Filed: 07/12/2012
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Joseph
court’s
order
petition.
or
judge
Brian
denying
relief
seeks
on
to
his
28
appeal
U.S.C.
the
district
§ 2254
(2006)
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues
a
certificate
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue
Tarleton
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.
Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Tarleton 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: 12-6215
Doc: 28
Filed: 07/12/2012
Pg: 3 of 3
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?