Danny Williams v. State of North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999324876-2]. Originating case number: 5:13-hc-02143-D. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999408193]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-6390]

Appeal: 14-6390

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/01/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6390

DANNY FRANKLIN WILLIAMS,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Department of Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (5:13-hc-02143-D)

Submitted:

July 28, 2014

Decided:

August 1, 2014

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Danny Franklin Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6390

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/01/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Danny Franklin Williams seeks to appeal the district
court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition
without prejudice.
justice

or

judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit
issues

a

certificate

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

of

appealability.

28

A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right.”

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

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 Williams 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: 14-6390

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/01/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

3