John Demos, Jr. v. Donald Holbrook

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to clarify jurisdiction [999561141-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999548457-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999548431-2]; denying Motion to clarify, amend, or modify [999548461-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00250-CCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999614599]. Mailed to: Demos. [15-6311]

Appeal: 15-6311

Doc: 19

Filed: 07/06/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6311

JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR., a/k/a Anwarri Shabazz,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
DONALD R. HOLBROOK, Superintendent; THE U.S.A.; WASHINGTON,
DC; THE UNITED STATES; THE STATE OF WASHINGTON,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
Catherine C. Blake, Chief District
Judge. (1:15-cv-00250-CCB)

Submitted:

June 19, 2015

Decided:

July 6, 2015

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Robert Demos, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6311

Doc: 19

Filed: 07/06/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
John Robert Demos, Jr., a state prisoner, seeks to appeal
the

district

court’s

order

§ 2241 (2012) petition.

denying

relief

on

his

28

U.S.C.

The order is not appealable unless a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A)

(2012).

A

certificate

of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2012).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

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

on

both

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
Demos has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

The motions for appointment

of counsel, to clarify jurisdiction, and to clarify, amend, or
modify are denied.

We dispense with oral argument because the
2

Appeal: 15-6311

facts

Doc: 19

and

materials

legal
before

Filed: 07/06/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.
DISMISSED

3