Michael Wayne Cephas v. Commonwealth

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999462578-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 1:14-cv-01066-CMH-IDD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999499219]. Mailed to: M. Cephas. [14-7449]

Appeal: 14-7449

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7449

MICHAEL WAYNE CEPHAS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-01066-CMH-IDD)

Submitted:

December 18, 2014

Decided:

December 23, 2014

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Wayne Cephas, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7449

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Michael

Wayne

Cephas

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition
without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

See

showing

of

the

denial

of

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

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 Cephas 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: 14-7449

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

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

3