Jonathan Gould v. Patsy Chavi

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999347087-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999347064-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 5:13-hc-02059-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999429256]. Mailed to: Jonathan Gould. [14-6518]

Appeal: 14-6518

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/04/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6518

JONATHAN M. GOULD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
PATSY CHAVIS,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:13-hc-02059-FL)

Submitted:

August 22, 2014

Before DUNCAN
Circuit Judge.

and

FLOYD,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

September 4, 2014

and

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan M. Gould, Appellant Pro Se.
Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6518

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/04/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jonathan M. Gould seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

of

appealability.

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

28

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 Gould has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny Gould’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny
leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 14-6518

Doc: 12

contentions

are

Filed: 09/04/2014

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3