Thomas Chilton, III v. Loretta Kelly
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999224665-2] Originating case number: 3:10-cv-00871-JRS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999326215]. Mailed to: Chilton. [13-7261]
Appeal: 13-7261
Doc: 9
Filed: 03/31/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7261
THOMAS A. CHILTON, III,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
LORETTA K. KELLY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (3:10-cv-00871-JRS)
Submitted:
March 27, 2014
Before MOTZ, Circuit
Circuit Judges.
Judge,
Decided: March 31, 2014
and
HAMILTON
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas A. Chilton, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald Eldridge
Jeffrey, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-7261
Doc: 9
Filed: 03/31/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Thomas A. Chilton, III, seeks to appeal the district
court’s
order
denying
his
Fed.
R.
Civ.
P.
60(b)
motion
for
reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on
his
28
U.S.C.
appealable
§ 2254
unless
petition.
circuit
a
(2012)
justice
certificate of appealability.
Reid
v.
Angelone,
A certificate
of
369
The
or
order
judge
is
issues
not
a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012);
F.3d
363,
appealability
369
will
(4th
not
Cir.
issue
2004).
absent
“a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
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 Chilton has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly,
we deny Chilton’s motion for a certificate of appealability and
2
Appeal: 13-7261
Doc: 9
Filed: 03/31/2014
dismiss the appeal.
facts
and
materials
legal
before
Pg: 3 of 3
We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
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?