Ronnie Stancil v. Roy Cooper
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00879-TDS-JLW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000007226]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-7336]
Appeal: 16-7336
Doc: 8
Filed: 01/20/2017
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7336
RONNIE STANCIL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ROY COOPER,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00879-TDS-JLW)
Submitted:
January 17, 2017
Decided:
January 20, 2017
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronnie Stancil, Appellant Pro Se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
Nicholaos George Vlahos, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7336
Doc: 8
Filed: 01/20/2017
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Ronnie Stancil seeks to appeal the district court’s order
and
judgment
petition.
denying
relief
on
his
28
U.S.C.
§ 2254
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue
(2012)
absent
“a
A certificate of appealability will not
substantial
constitutional right.”
See 28 U.S.C.
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
Stancil has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
2
the
facts
and
We
legal
Appeal: 16-7336
Doc: 8
contentions
Filed: 01/20/2017
are
adequately
Pg: 3 of 3
presented
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?