Stanley Williams v. Sidney Harkleroad
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999097010-2]. Originating case number: 1:03-cv-00299-TDS-PTS. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999167650]. Mailed to: Stanley Williams. [13-6397]
Stanley Williams v. Sidney Harkleroad
Appeal: 13-6397
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/07/2013
Doc. 0
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6397
STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SIDNEY HARKLEROAD, Superintendent; THEODIS BECK, Secretary
of Corrections,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:03-cv-00299-TDS-PTS)
Submitted:
July 31, 2013
Decided:
August 7, 2013
Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Sandra WallaceSmith, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Dockets.Justia.com
Appeal: 13-6397
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Stanley Lorenzo Williams seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying his motion for leave to file a “Motion for
Leave to File a Rule (6) FRCP Motion to Enlarge Time to File
Amendments/An Additional Constitutional Claim Pursuant to Graham
v. Florida 130 S.C. 2011 176 LEd 2d 825 (2010).”
not
appealable
unless
a
circuit
certificate of appealability.
A
certificate
of
justice
or
The order is
judge
issues
a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
appealability
will
not
issue
absent
“a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).
relief
on
the
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
When the district court denies
Slack
satisfies
jurists
this
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
standard
find
constitutional
529
U.S.
by
that
the
claims
is
473,
484
(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.
at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Williams has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
2
Appeal: 13-6397
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/07/2013
Pg: 3 of 3
forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this 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?