From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Lane

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Feb 26, 2019
No. 18-7344 (4th Cir. Feb. 26, 2019)

Opinion

No. 18-7344

02-26-2019

ALWIN T. JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GARY LANE, Warden, Kershaw Correctional Institution, Respondent - Appellee.

Alwin T. Jones, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:17-cv-02128-JFA) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alwin T. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Alwin T. Jones seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely 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 Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Jones' motion to appoint counsel, 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

Jones v. Lane

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Feb 26, 2019
No. 18-7344 (4th Cir. Feb. 26, 2019)
Case details for

Jones v. Lane

Case Details

Full title:ALWIN T. JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GARY LANE, Warden, Kershaw…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 26, 2019

Citations

No. 18-7344 (4th Cir. Feb. 26, 2019)