From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bowden v. Clarke

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 18, 2018
No. 18-6402 (4th Cir. Sep. 18, 2018)

Opinion

No. 18-6402

09-18-2018

ANTOINE LORENZO BOWDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.

Antoine Lorenzo Bowden, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief District Judge. (2:17-cv-00196-RBS-LRL) Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antoine Lorenzo Bowden, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Antoine Lorenzo Bowden seeks to appeal the district court's 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 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 Bowden has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 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


Summaries of

Bowden v. Clarke

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 18, 2018
No. 18-6402 (4th Cir. Sep. 18, 2018)
Case details for

Bowden v. Clarke

Case Details

Full title:ANTOINE LORENZO BOWDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. HAROLD W. CLARKE…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Sep 18, 2018

Citations

No. 18-6402 (4th Cir. Sep. 18, 2018)