William MacDonald v. Tim Moose


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999482556-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999454625-2] Originating case number: 1:09-cv-01047-GBL-TRJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999591353]. Mailed to: William Scott MacDonald. [14-7326]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7326 Doc: 13 Filed: 05/28/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7326 WILLIAM SCOTT MACDONALD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. TIM MOOSE, Respondent – Appellee, and KEITH HOLDER, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01047-GBL-TRJ) Submitted: January 22, 2015 Decided: May 28, 2015 Before MOTZ, KING, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Scott MacDonald, Appellant Pro Se. III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF Virginia, for Appellee. Robert H. Anderson, VIRGINIA, Richmond, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-7326 Doc: 13 Filed: 05/28/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: William Scott MacDonald seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as it pertained to his Virginia misdemeanor conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. not appealable unless a circuit certificate of appealability. A certificate of justice or The order is judge issues a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). appealability will not issue absent “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 prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. When the district court denies Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find constitutional 529 U.S. by that the claims 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 MacDonald has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny appointment of counsel, and dismiss the 2 Appeal: 14-7326 Doc: 13 appeal. legal before Filed: 05/28/2015 Pg: 3 of 3 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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?