James Gregory Armistead v. Brad Perritt


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999781145-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999787124-2]; granting Motion for leave to file [999804707-2] Originating case number: 5:15-hc-02019-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999922310]. Mailed to: James G. Armistead SCOTLAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 22385 McGirt's Bridge Road Laurinburg, NC 28353. [16-6390]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-6390 Doc: 14 Filed: 09/02/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6390 JAMES GREGORY ARMISTEAD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRAD PERRITT, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:15-hc-02019-F) Submitted: August 18, 2016 Decided: September 2, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Gregory Armistead, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 16-6390 Doc: 14 Filed: 09/02/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: James court’s Gregory order petition. Armistead denying relief seeks on to appeal 28 U.S.C. his § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). absent “a prisoner § 2254 (2012) the showing of the denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). district court satisfies this jurists would reasonable See 28 U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” When district The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. issue the denies relief standard find by that on the merits, demonstrating the district a that 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). denies relief demonstrate both on procedural that the When the district court grounds, dispositive the prisoner procedural ruling must 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 Armistead has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny the motion to appoint counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We construe Armistead’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint as a motion for leave to file an amended or 2 Appeal: 16-6390 Doc: 14 Filed: 09/02/2016 Pg: 3 of 3 supplemental informal brief on appeal, and we grant the motion. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court 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?