Antoine Thornton v. Director of Virginia D.O.C.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999103154-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 7:12-cv-00443-JLK-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999132102]. Mailed to: Thornton. [13-6421]

Appeal: 13-6421

Doc: 17

Filed: 06/18/2013

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6421

ANTOINE JERMAINE THORNTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:12-cv-00443-JLK-RSB)

Submitted:

June 13, 2013

Decided:

June 18, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antoine Jermaine Thornton, Appellant Pro Se.
James Milburn
Isaacs, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-6421

Doc: 17

Filed: 06/18/2013

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Antoine Jermaine Thornton seeks to appeal the district
court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)
petition.
or

judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

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 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 v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484-85 (2000).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Thornton 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
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

2