Jesse Purcell v. Carl Mani

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999357694-2] Originating case number: 7:13-cv-00489-MFU-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999445522]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-6677]

Appeal: 14-6677

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/30/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6677

JESSE JAMES PURCELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CARL MANIS, Warden, Green Rock Correctional Center,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District
Judge. (7:13-cv-00489-MFU-RSB)

Submitted:

September 25, 2014

Decided:

September 30, 2014

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse James Purcell, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey,
III, Assistant
Attorney
General,
Richmond,
Virginia,
for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6677

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/30/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jesse
court’s

order

petition.
or

judge

James
denying

relief

seeks
on

to
28

his

appeal
U.S.C.

the

district

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

Purcell

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 Purcell 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: 14-6677

Doc: 10

Filed: 09/30/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3