Kim Griffin v. Willard Hall

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999598006-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 1:14-cv-00007-LCB-JEP Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999628944]. Mailed to: Kim Antonio Griffin WARREN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 728 Norlina, NC 27563. [15-6679]

Appeal: 15-6679

Doc: 11

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6679

KIM ANTONIO GRIFFIN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WILLARD R. HALL,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta Copeland Biggs,
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00007-LCB-JEP)

Submitted:

July 23, 2015

Decided:

July 28, 2015

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kim Antonio Griffin, Appellant Pro Se.
Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6679

Doc: 11

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kim Antonio Griffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.

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.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).

28 U.S.C.

When the district court denies relief on the

merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that
reasonable jurists would find that the district 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).

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
Griffin 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 presented

2

Appeal: 15-6679

Doc: 11

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3