Lee Knowlin v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999411683-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 1:13-cv-00676-CMH-TRJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999478744]. Mailed to: Knowlin. [13-7577]

Appeal: 13-7577

Doc: 20

Filed: 11/20/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7577

LEE ROY KNOWLIN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE; VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD; VIRGINIA GOVERNING
AGENTS,
Respondents – Appellees,
and
UNKNOWN,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:13-cv-00676-CMH-TRJ)

Submitted:

November 18, 2014

Decided:

November 20, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lee Roy Knowlin, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7577

Doc: 20

Filed: 11/20/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Lee Roy Knowlin seeks to appeal the district court’s
order

dismissing

petition.
or

judge

as

successive

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
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) (2012).

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 Knowlin 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: 13-7577

Doc: 20

Filed: 11/20/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

3