Charles Watson v. Brad Perritt
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999388157-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999388148-2]; denying Motion for consideration as moot [999460251-2]. Originating case number: 5:13-hc-02221-BO. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999469706]. Mailed to: Charles Watson. [14-6926]
Appeal: 14-6926
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/05/2014
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6926
CHARLES WATSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
BRAD PERRITT,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-hc-02221-BO)
Submitted:
October 24, 2014
Decided:
November 5, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Watson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-6926
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/05/2014
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Charles Watson seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders
dismissing
as
untimely
his
28
U.S.C.
§
2254
petition and denying his motion for reconsideration.
(2012)
The orders
are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012);
Reid
363,
v.
Angelone,
certificate
of
369
F.3d
appealability
369
will
(4th
not
Cir.
2004).
absent
issue
A
“a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief
on
the
demonstrating
district
merits,
that
court’s
debatable
or
a
When the district court denies
prisoner
reasonable
assessment
wrong.
Slack
satisfies
jurists
this
would
of
the
v.
McDaniel,
standard
find
that
U.S.
the
claims
constitutional
529
by
is
473,
484
(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
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 Watson has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny Watson’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny
leave
to
proceed
in
forma
pauperis,
2
deny
his
motion
for
Appeal: 14-6926
Doc: 22
Filed: 11/05/2014
Pg: 3 of 3
consideration as moot, and dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with
oral
contentions
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
and
materials
legal
before
this
court
are
and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?