Michael Needham v. Keith Whitener

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999272305-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 5:13-cv-00104-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999344622]. Mailed to: Needham. [13-8038]

Appeal: 13-8038

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/28/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-8038

MICHAEL DORSEY NEEDHAM,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
KEITH
WHITENER,
Institution,

Administrator,

Alexander

Correctional

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (5:13-cv-00104-FDW)

Submitted:

April 24, 2014

Decided:

April 28, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Dorsey Needham, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Raleigh,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-8038

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/28/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Michael Dorsey Needham seeks to appeal the district
court’s

order

petition.
or

judge

denying

on

his

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

relief

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 Needham 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: 13-8038

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/28/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3