Joe Fulgham v. None


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999699024-2]; denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999668566-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 2:12-cv-00445-AWA-TEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999755151]. Mailed to: Joe Lee Fulgham. [15-7429]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-7429 Doc: 26 Filed: 02/16/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7429 JOE LEE FULGHAM, Petitioner – Appellant, v. NONE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:12-cv-00445-AWA-TEM) Submitted: January 26, 2016 Decided: February 16, 2016 Before WILKINSON, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joe Lee Fulgham, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-7429 Doc: 26 Filed: 02/16/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Joe Lee Fulgham seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (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 Fulgham has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of appealability, deny dismiss the appeal. facts and legal Fulgham’s motion to appoint counsel, and We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are 2 adequately presented in the Appeal: 15-7429 Doc: 26 materials before Filed: 02/16/2016 this court Pg: 3 of 3 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?