Michael Loiseau v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999194415-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 3:12-cv-00580-REP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999263960]. Mailed to: Michael Loiseau. [13-7319]

Appeal: 13-7319

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/20/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7319

MICHAEL LOISEAU,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:12-cv-00580-REP)

Submitted:

December 17, 2013

Decided:

December 20, 2013

Before KING, GREGORY, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Angelo Loiseau, Appellant Pro Se.
Lauren Catherine
Campbell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7319

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/20/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Michael Loiseau seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

petition.
or

judge

as

untimely

28

U.S.C.

§

2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

his

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 Loiseau 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: 13-7319

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/20/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3