Ronnie Penley v. Cynthia Thornton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999312258-2]. Originating case number: 5:14-cv-00012-FDW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999364621]. Mailed to: Ronnie Penley. [14-6311]

Appeal: 14-6311

Doc: 9

Filed: 05/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6311

RONNIE NEIL PENLEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CYNTHIA
THORNTON,
Institution,

Administrator,

Harnett

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. (5:14-cv-00012-FDW)

Submitted:

May 22, 2014

Before TRAXLER,
Circuit Judges.

Chief

Decided: May 29, 2014

Judge,

and

HAMILTON

and

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronnie Neil Penley, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6311

Doc: 9

Filed: 05/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ronnie
court’s

order

petition.
or

judge

Neil

Penley

denying

relief

on

to

appeal

28

U.S.C.

his

the

district

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

seeks

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 Penley 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: 14-6311

Doc: 9

Filed: 05/29/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3