Rodney Jones v. Joyner

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999709638-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999694095-2] Originating case number: 3:14-cv-00420-FDW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999766181]. Mailed to: Rodney Jones. [15-7725]

Appeal: 15-7725

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/02/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7725

RODNEY JONES,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
FNU JOYNER,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:14-cv-00420-FDW)

Submitted:

February 25, 2016

Before SHEDD and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Circuit

Decided:

Judges,

and

March 2, 2016

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney Eugene Jones, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 15-7725

Doc: 9

Filed: 03/02/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Rodney Eugene Jones 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.

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

28

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
Jones has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, deny Jones’ motion to appoint counsel, and dismiss the
appeal.
legal

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions

are

adequately
2

presented

in

the

materials

Appeal: 15-7725

before

Doc: 9

this

Filed: 03/02/2016

court

and

Pg: 3 of 3

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3