From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Hardee

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Aug 25, 2014
582 F. App'x 185 (4th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 14-6342

08-25-2014

LARRY MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MICHAEL A. HARDEE, Respondent - Appellee.

Larry Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:12-hc-02294-FL) Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Larry Miller seeks to appeal the district court's order 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 Miller 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

Miller v. Hardee

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Aug 25, 2014
582 F. App'x 185 (4th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Miller v. Hardee

Case Details

Full title:LARRY MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MICHAEL A. HARDEE, Respondent …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Aug 25, 2014

Citations

582 F. App'x 185 (4th Cir. 2014)