Abbas Ahmed v. Loretta Kelly
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999043564-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998986742-2] Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00184-GBL-TCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [12-7831]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ABBAS JAVED AHMED,
Petitioner - Appellant,
LORETTA KELLY, Warden; DAVID B. EVERETT, Warden,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
May 30, 2013
June 4, 2013
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Bernard Hargett, HARGETT LAW, PLC, Glen Allen, Virginia,
for Appellant. Gregory William Franklin, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Abbas Javed Ahmed seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition,
and has filed a motion for a certificate of appealability and an
application to proceed in forma pauperis.
The district court’s
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a certificate of appealability.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).
When the district court denies
(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
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.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Ahmed has not made the requisite showing.
deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral
Pg: 3 of 3
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
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?