Jermaine Pickett v. Gene Johnson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:08-cv-00505-GEC-mfu Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999795976]. Mailed to: Jermaine Pickett. [15-8016]

Appeal: 15-8016

Doc: 7

Filed: 04/15/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8016

JERMAINE LORENZO PICKETT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
GENE JOHNSON, Director Virginia Dept. of Correction,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Glen E. Conrad, Chief
District Judge. (7:08-cv-00505-GEC-mfu)

Submitted:

April 13, 2016

Decided:

April 15, 2016

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jermaine Lorenzo Pickett, Appellant Pro Se.
Jennifer Conrad
Williamson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-8016

Doc: 7

Filed: 04/15/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Jermaine
court’s

Lorenzo
denying

his

order

Pickett

seeks

Fed.

R.

to

appeal

Civ.

P.

the

60(b)

district

motion

for

reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on
his

28

U.S.C.

appealable

§ 2254

unless

petition.

circuit

a

(2012)

justice

certificate of appealability.
Reid

v.

Angelone,

A certificate

of

369

The
or

order

judge

is

issues

not
a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012);

F.3d

363,

appealability

369

will

(4th

not

Cir.

issue

2004).

absent

“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief

on

the

merits,

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

satisfies

this

standard

by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district
court’s
wrong.

assessment

of

the

constitutional

claims

debatable

or

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
Pickett has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because
2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 15-8016

Doc: 7

contentions

Filed: 04/15/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3