Akil Dorsey v. Harold Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999872643-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999830039-2]. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-01054-JCC-TCB. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999949363]. Mailed to: Akil Dorsey. [16-6701]

Appeal: 16-6701

Doc: 15

Filed: 10/18/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6701

AKIL DORSEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD CLARKE, Director, Virginia DOC,
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-01054-JCC-TCB)

Submitted:

October 13, 2016

Decided:

October 18, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Akil Dorsey, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Thomas Judge, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6701

Doc: 15

Filed: 10/18/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Akil

Dorsey

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.
(2012).

See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

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

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

standard

find

constitutional
529

U.S.

by

that

the

claims

is

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
Dorsey has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

Dorsey’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave
to

proceed

dispense

in

with

forma

pauperis,

oral

argument

and

dismiss

because

2

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 16-6701

Doc: 15

contentions

are

Filed: 10/18/2016

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3