Kerry Lee Winslow v. Harold W. Clarke

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]

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UNPUBLISHED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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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