Lacy Lee Williams, Jr. v. State of North Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999712669-2] Originating case number: 5:15-hc-02082-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999799920]. Mailed to: Lacy Lee Williams Jr. MAURY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 506 Maury, NC 28554-0000. [15-7837]

Appeal: 15-7837

Doc: 12

Filed: 04/21/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7837

LACY LEE WILLIAMS, JR.,
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-02082-FL)

Submitted:

April 19, 2016

Decided:

April 21, 2016

Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lacy Lee Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7837

Doc: 12

Filed: 04/21/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Lacy Lee Williams, Jr., 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 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
Williams has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, based

on the sound reasoning of the district court, we deny a certificate
of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and
dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

2

adequately

presented

in

the

Appeal: 15-7837

Doc: 12

materials

before

Filed: 04/21/2016

this

court

Pg: 3 of 3

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.
DISMISSED

3