Lloyd Sheppard v. Harold Clark

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998990051-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998970177-2] Originating case number: 7:11-cv-00540-GEC-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999074308]. Mailed to: appellant. [12-7729]

Appeal: 12-7729

Doc: 17

Filed: 03/28/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7729

LLOYD WAYNE SHEPPARD,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
HAROLD
W.
Corrections,

CLARK,

Director,

Virginia

Department

of

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge. (7:11-cv-00540-GEC-RSB)

Submitted:

March 26, 2013

Decided:

March 28, 2013

Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lloyd Wayne Sheppard, Appellant Pro Se. Katherine Quinlan
Adelfio, Jennifer Conrad Williamson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7729

Doc: 17

Filed: 03/28/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Lloyd
court’s

order

petition.
or

judge

Wayne
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

Sheppard

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 Sheppard 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: 12-7729

Doc: 17

Filed: 03/28/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3