Khayr Rooks v. Eddie Pearson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999507953-2] Originating case number: 1:13-cv-00543-CMH-TRJ. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999531018]. Mailed to: Khayr Rooks. [14-7862]

Appeal: 14-7862

Doc: 13

Filed: 02/19/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7862

KHAYR ROOKS,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
EDDIE L. PEARSON, Warden at Sussex I State Prison,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:13-cv-00543-CMH-TRJ)

Submitted:

February 12, 2015

Decided:

February 19, 2015

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Khayr Rooks, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Stallard,
Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Assistant

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7862

Doc: 13

Filed: 02/19/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Khayr Rooks seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.

The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a

certificate

(2012).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A)

A certificate of 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 Rooks 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: 14-7862

Doc: 13

Filed: 02/19/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3