Aaron Doxie, III v. Jeffrey Dillman

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999911335-2], denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999906040-2] Originating case number: 2:13-cv-00505-AWA-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999968190]. Mailed to: Aaron Doxie III AUGUSTA CORRECTIONAL CENTER 1821 Estaline Valley Road Craigsville, VA 24430-0000. [16-6983]

Appeal: 16-6983

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/15/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6983

AARON DOXIE, III, a/k/a Aharon Azaryah Nearyah Hakahan,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN JEFFREY N. DILLMAN, Warden; DIRECTOR HAROLD CLARKE,
Director,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:13-cv-00505-AWA-DEM)

Submitted:

November 10, 2016

Decided:

November 15, 2016

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Aaron Doxie, III, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6983

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/15/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Aaron

Doxie,

III,

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s

order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing as successive 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.

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

28

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
Doxie has not made the requisite showing.
a

certificate

seeking leave
appeal.

of
to

appealability,
proceed

in

forma

deny

Accordingly, we deny
Doxie’s

pauperis,

and

applications
dismiss

the

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
2

Appeal: 16-6983

legal
before

Doc: 9

Filed: 11/15/2016

contentions
this

court

Pg: 3 of 3

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
DISMISSED

3