Jerry Adams v. James Beal

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying motion for discovery [999949997-2] Originating case number: 7:15-cv-00594-MFU-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000016620]. Mailed to: Jerry L. Adams. [16-7135]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7135 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7135 JERRY L. ADAMS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. JAMES V. BEAL, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District Judge. (7:15-cv-00594-MFU-RSB) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry L. Adams, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7135 Doc: 12 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Jerry L. Adams 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 (2012). of appealability. 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.” U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). 28 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 constitutional right. a debatable claim of the denial of a Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Adams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motion for discovery, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. facts and legal We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are 2 adequately presented in the Appeal: 16-7135 Doc: 12 materials before Filed: 02/03/2017 this court Pg: 3 of 3 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?