From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moody v. Dir. of Dep't of Corr. of Va.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jul 25, 2013
535 F. App'x 302 (4th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 13-6360

07-25-2013

MARVIN JERMAINE MOODY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OF VIRGINIA, Respondent - Appellee.

Marvin J. Moody, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory William Franklin, Elizabeth Catherine Kiernan, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:12-cv-00463-GBL-TRJ) Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marvin J. Moody, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory William Franklin, Elizabeth Catherine Kiernan, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Marvin J. Moody seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 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) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Moody 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

Moody v. Dir. of Dep't of Corr. of Va.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jul 25, 2013
535 F. App'x 302 (4th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Moody v. Dir. of Dep't of Corr. of Va.

Case Details

Full title:MARVIN JERMAINE MOODY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jul 25, 2013

Citations

535 F. App'x 302 (4th Cir. 2013)