Opinion
21-6240
10-19-2021
DAVID MEYERS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. HAROLD CLARKE, Respondent - Appellee.
David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: September 29, 2021
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:20-cv-00466-RAJ-DEM)
David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Meyers seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Meyers' 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as an unauthorized, successive § 2254 petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 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). When, as here, 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. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Meyers has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Meyers' motions for a full record of state court proceedings, for a more definitive statement and to strike the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and the district court's order, and for injunctive relief. 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