Kerry Lee Winslow v. Harold W. Clarke


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999967402-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00440-RCY Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000039762]. Mailed to: Kerry Lee Winslow JAMES RIVER WORK CENTER 1954 State Farm Road State Farm, VA 23160-0000. [16-7481]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7481 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/10/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7481 KERRY LEE WINSLOW, Petitioner - Appellant, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Roderick Charles Young, Magistrate Judge. (3:15-cv-00440-RCY) Submitted: February 24, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Decided: NIEMEYER, March 10, 2017 Circuit Judge, and Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kerry Lee Winslow, Appellant Pro Se. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Appellee. Leah A. Darron, OFFICE OF Richmond, Virginia, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7481 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/10/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Kerry Lee Winslow seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’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 § 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 Winslow has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012). 2 Appeal: 16-7481 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/10/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 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?