Bernard Gibson, Jr. v. Eric Wilson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999416675-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 1:14-cv-00454-JCC-TRJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999481872].. [14-7093]

Appeal: 14-7093

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/25/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7093

BERNARD GIBSON, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC D. WILSON,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00454-JCC-TRJ)

Submitted:

November 20, 2014

Decided:

November 25, 2014

Before KING and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bernard Gibson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7093

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/25/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Bernard
court’s

order

Gibson,

denying

Jr.,

relief

seeks

on

to

his

28

appeal

the

U.S.C.

district

§ 2241

(2012)

petition, which the court correctly treated as a successive 28
U.S.C.

§

2255

(2012)

motion,

as

well

as

Gibson’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.
appealable

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

justice

its

order

denying

The orders are not
or

judge

issues

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

appealability

will

not

issue

absent

“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28
U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2)

relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

(2012).
a

When

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

Slack

the

district

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

court

standard

find

by

U.S.

that

the

claims

constitutional
529

denies

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

motion

states

claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

a

debatable

Slack, 529 U.S.

at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Gibson has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny Gibson’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a
2

Appeal: 14-7093

Doc: 9

certificate
dispense

Filed: 11/25/2014

of

with

contentions

are

Pg: 3 of 3

appealability,
oral

argument

adequately

and

dismiss

because

presented

in

the
the

the

appeal.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3