Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Nicholas Cauley v. Superintendent Joyce Kornegay, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Nicholas Cauley's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the district court's orders, because Cauley failed to make a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Cauley did not demonstrate that the district court's rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed Cauley's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-09-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7093

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Nicholas Cauley's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the district court's orders, because Cauley failed to make a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Cauley did not demonstrate that the district court's rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed Cauley's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views3 pages

    Nicholas Cauley v. Superintendent Joyce Kornegay, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Nicholas Cauley's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the district court's orders, because Cauley failed to make a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Cauley did not demonstrate that the district court's rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed Cauley's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-7093

    NICHOLAS N. CAULEY,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    SUPERINTENDENT JOYCE KORNEGAY,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Dever III,
    Chief District Judge. (5:11-hc-02083-D)

    Submitted:

    September 11, 2012

    Decided:

    September 18, 2012

    Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Nicholas N. Cauley, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Nicholas
    courts

    orders

    (2006)

    petition

    or

    Cauley

    dismissing

    reconsideration.
    justice

    N.

    and

    as

    seeks

    to

    untimely

    denying

    his

    appeal
    his

    28

    the

    district

    U.S.C.

    subsequent

    2254

    motion

    for

    The orders are not appealable unless a circuit

    judge

    issues

    certificate

    U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).

    of

    appealability.

    28

    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 courts assessment of the constitutional


    claims is debatable or wrong.

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

    484

    Cockrell,

    (2000);

    (2003).

    see

    Miller-El

    v.

    537

    U.S.

    322,

    336-38

    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 Cauley 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


    2

    presented in the materials before the court and argument would


    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like