Zeontray Woodard v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999910186-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00814-CMH-MSN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999973248]. Mailed to: Zeontray Woodard. [16-6973]
Appeal: 16-6973
Doc: 12
Filed: 11/22/2016
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6973
ZEONTRAY CALVIN WOODARD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:16-cv-00814-CMH-MSN)
Submitted:
November 17, 2016
Decided:
November 22, 2016
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Zeontray Calvin Woodard, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6973
Doc: 12
Filed: 11/22/2016
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Zeontray Calvin Woodard 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.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).
28 U.S.C.
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 (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
Woodard has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
presented
Appeal: 16-6973
Doc: 12
Filed: 11/22/2016
Pg: 3 of 3
in the materials 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?