Christopher Earl Cottrell v. Harold W. Clarke
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999993945-2], denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999993905-2], denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999984732-2], denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999975860-2]; denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999967454-2] Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00200-HEH-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Christopher Earl Cottrell RED ONION STATE PRISON 10800 H. Jack Rose Highway P. O. Box 970 Pound, VA 24279-0000. [16-7441]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
CHRISTOPHER EARL COTTRELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
HAROLD W. CLARKE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
February 16, 2017
February 22, 2017
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Earl Cottrell, Appellant Pro Se. Victoria Lee Johnson,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
A certificate of appealability will not
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
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-
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Cottrell has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
Cottrell’s motion for a transcript at government expense, deny his
motion for a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal.
Pg: 3 of 3
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?