Mansour Salahmand v. Peggy Anthony

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998898339-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998930561-2] Originating case number: 1:12-cv-00493-JCC-TCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999017409]. Mailed to: Mansour Salahmand. [12-7203]

Appeal: 12-7203

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/08/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7203

MANSOUR SALAHMAND,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
PEGGY ANTHONY; PROBATION & PAROLE DISTRICT 25; DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS,
Respondent - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:12-cv-00493-JCC-TCB)

Submitted:

November 28, 2012

Decided:

January 8, 2013

Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mansour Salahmand, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7203

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/08/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Mansour Salahmand seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

petition.
or

judge

as

untimely

28

U.S.C.

§

2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

his

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 Salahmand has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny Salahmand’s motion for a certificate of appealability,
deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.
We

dispense

with

oral

argument

2

because

the

facts

and

legal

Appeal: 12-7203

Doc: 13

contentions

are

Filed: 01/08/2013

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3