Anthony Barnhill v. State of North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999357591-2] in 14-6573, denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999357602-2] in 14-6575 Originating case number: 5:12-hc-02130-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999444630]. Mailed to: Anthony Barnhill. [14-6573, 14-6575]

Appeal: 14-6573

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6573

ANTHONY JUNIOR BARNHILL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.

No. 14-6575

ANTHONY JUNIOR BARNHILL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:12-hc-02130-F; 5:12-hc-02153-F)

Submitted:

September 25, 2014

Decided:

September 29, 2014

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Appeal: 14-6573

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 4

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Junior Barnhill, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 14-6573

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/29/2014

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Anthony Junior Barnhill
seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying identical
post-judgment

motions

he

filed

in

the

underlying

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2012) proceedings.

The orders are not appealable unless

a

judge

circuit

justice

appealability.

or

issues

a

certificate

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

of

A certificate

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

both

on

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

ruling

must
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 Barnhill has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny certificates of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeals.

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
3

Appeal: 14-6573

Doc: 12

Filed: 09/29/2014

Pg: 4 of 4

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

4