From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kuplen v. Perry

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 29, 2015
608 F. App'x 148 (4th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 15-6161

06-29-2015

JOHN EDWARD KUPLEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. FRANK PERRY, Respondent - Appellee.

John Edward Kuplen, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:14-cv-00078-WO-LPA) Before GREGORY, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Edward Kuplen, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

John Edward Kuplen seeks to appeal the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Kuplen's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition relating to a prison disciplinary conviction and denying his motion to alter or amend. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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). 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 (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 Kuplen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 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


Summaries of

Kuplen v. Perry

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 29, 2015
608 F. App'x 148 (4th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Kuplen v. Perry

Case Details

Full title:JOHN EDWARD KUPLEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. FRANK PERRY, Respondent …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jun 29, 2015

Citations

608 F. App'x 148 (4th Cir. 2015)

Citing Cases

Mason v. Perry

fit will be obtained . . . To that extent the general interest asserted here is no more substantial than the…

James-El v. Hooks

see also Jago v. Van Curen, 454 U.S. 14, 18 (1981) (mutually explicit understanding that inmate would be…