Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Jeffery Porter v. Harold Clarke, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Jeffery Edward Porter's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court of appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Porter did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability, as reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's assessment of Porter's constitutional claims. Accordingly, the court dismissed Porter's appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-05-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-6277

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Jeffery Edward Porter's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court of appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Porter did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability, as reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's assessment of Porter's constitutional claims. Accordingly, the court dismissed Porter's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    5 views3 pages

    Jeffery Porter v. Harold Clarke, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Jeffery Edward Porter's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court of appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Porter did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability, as reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's assessment of Porter's constitutional claims. Accordingly, the court dismissed Porter's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-6277

    JEFFERY EDWARD PORTER,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    HAROLD W. CLARKE,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
    Robert G. Doumar, Senior
    District Judge. (2:14-cv-00015-RGD-LRL)

    Submitted:

    May 21, 2015

    Decided:

    May 27, 2015

    Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jeffery Edward Porter, Appellant Pro Se.


    Susan Mozley Harris,
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Jeffery Edward Porter seeks to appeal the district courts
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    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

    (2012).

    of

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(A)

    A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).
    relief

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district

    merits,
    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    When the district court denies

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    of

    the

    v.

    McDaniel,

    Slack

    this

    standard

    find

    constitutional
    529

    U.S.

    by

    that

    the

    claims

    is

    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 484-85.
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
    Porter has not made the requisite showing.
    a

    certificate

    dispense

    with

    of

    appealability

    oral

    argument

    and

    dismiss

    because

    Accordingly, we deny

    the

    the

    appeal.

    facts

    and

    We
    legal

    contentions

    are

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like