Paris Whedbee v. Director of the Department

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999933066-2] Originating case number: 1:16-cv-00118-TSE-TCB. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000013465]. Mailed to: Paris Mitchell Whedbee; Joseph Christian Obenshain. [16-7188]

Appeal: 16-7188

Doc: 10

Filed: 01/31/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7188

PARIS M. WHEDBEE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR OF THE DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:16-cv-00118-TSE-TCB)

Submitted:

January 19, 2017

Before GREGORY,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

NIEMEYER

January 31, 2017

and

WYNN,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Paris Mitchell Whedbee, Appellant Pro Se.
Joseph Christian
Obenshain, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7188

Doc: 10

Filed: 01/31/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Paris M. Whedbee seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing as untimely 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
Whedbee 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

Appeal: 16-7188

Doc: 10

Filed: 01/31/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3