Charles Gene Rogers v. State of North Carolina
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999641089-2] Originating case number: 5:15-hc-02042-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999707976]. Mailed to: Rogers. [15-7157]
Appeal: 15-7157
Doc: 10
Filed: 11/30/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7157
CHARLES GENE ROGERS,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:15-hc-02042-FL)
Submitted:
November 13, 2015
Before KING and
Circuit Judge.
THACKER,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
November 30, 2015
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Gene Rogers, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-7157
Doc: 10
Filed: 11/30/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Charles Gene Rogers 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
§ 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
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
Rogers has not made the requisite showing.
leave
to
proceed
in
forma
pauperis,
appealability, and dismiss the appeal.
Accordingly, we deny
deny
a
certificate
of
We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
Appeal: 15-7157
Doc: 10
Filed: 11/30/2015
Pg: 3 of 3
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?