Frank Lee v. Unknown

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for injunctive relief pending appeal (FRAP 8) [999692107-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999631874-2] Originating case number: 1:14-cv-00854-AJT-JFA. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999705769]. Mailed to: Frank Lee. [15-7144]

Appeal: 15-7144

Doc: 13

Filed: 11/24/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7144

FRANK JOHNSON LEE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNKNOWN; DIRECTOR, Virginia Department of Corrections,
Respondents- Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Anthony John Trenga,
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00854-AJT-JFA)

Submitted:

November 19, 2015

Decided:

November 24, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank Johnson Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7144

Doc: 13

Filed: 11/24/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Frank
order

Lee

dismissing

petition.
or

Johnson

judge

as

to

untimely

appeal

his

28

the

district

U.S.C.

court’s

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

seeks

absent

“a

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

of

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).

of

a

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

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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
Lee has not made the requisite showing.
Lee’s

motions

and

for

injunctive relief pending appeal, and dismiss the appeal.

We

dispense

with

for

oral

a

certificate

argument

of

Accordingly, we deny

because

2

appealability

the

facts

and

legal

Appeal: 15-7144

Doc: 13

contentions

are

Filed: 11/24/2015

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3