Mahdi Holmes v. Director, VDOC

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999805028-2] Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00649-JCC-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999901123]. Mailed to: Mahdi Holmes. [16-6341]

Appeal: 16-6341

Doc: 16

Filed: 08/01/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6341

MAHDI JIBRI HOLMES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA DEPT. OF CORR.,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00649-JCC-JFA)

Submitted:

July 28, 2016

Before MOTZ and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

August 1, 2016

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mahdi Jibri Holmes, Appellant Pro Se.
Susan Mozley Harris,
Craig Stallard, Assistant Attorneys General, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6341

Doc: 16

Filed: 08/01/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Mahdi Jibri Holmes 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
Holmes has not made the requisite showing.
leave

to

proceed

in

forma

pauperis,

appealability, and dismiss the appeal.

2

Accordingly, we deny

deny

a

certificate

of

We dispense with oral

Appeal: 16-6341

Doc: 16

Filed: 08/01/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3