Siddhanth Sharma v. Unknown Respondent
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999900294-2] Originating case number: 5:15-hc-02209-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Siddhanth Sharma MORRISON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 169 Hoffman, NC 28347-0000. [16-6520]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Petitioner - Appellant,
UNKNOWN RESPONDENT; PAT MCCRORY; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:15-hc-02209-BO)
December 30, 2016
January 6, 2017
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Siddhanth Sharma, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Siddhanth Sharma, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(2012) petition challenging his pretrial detention.
is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
When the district court denies
(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.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Sharma’s petition is moot because he was convicted after filing
See Jackson v. Clements, 796 F.3d 841, 843 (7th
Cir. 2015) (per curiam).
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
dismiss the appeal.
Pg: 3 of 3
We dispense with oral argument because the
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?