Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Dione Parker v. Gene Johnson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Dione Parker's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Parker did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability to be issued. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Parker's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-06-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-6067

    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 Dione Parker's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Parker did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability to be issued. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Parker's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Copyright:

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

    Dione Parker v. Gene Johnson, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Dione Parker's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Parker did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability to be issued. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Parker's motion for appointment of counsel.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 11-6067

    DIONE OMARROW PARKER,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE JOHNSON,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Liam OGrady, District
    Judge. (1:09-cv-01320-LO-JFA)

    Submitted:

    June 16, 2011

    Before NIEMEYER and


    Senior Circuit Judge.

    GREGORY,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    Judges,

    June 20, 2011

    and

    HAMILTON,

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dione OMarrow Parker, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua Mikell Didlake,


    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Dione
    courts

    order

    petition.
    or

    judge

    OMarrow
    denying

    relief

    seeks

    on

    to

    his

    28

    appeal

    the

    U.S.C.

    district

    2254

    (2006)

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice


    issues

    certificate

    2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
    issue

    Parker

    absent

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    of

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).

    of

    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.
    529 U.S. at 484-85.

    Slack,

    We have independently reviewed the record

    and conclude that Parker has not made the requisite showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss
    the

    appeal.

    We

    also

    appointment of counsel.

    deny

    Parkers

    pending

    motion

    for

    We dispense with oral argument because

    the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

    materials

    before

    the

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like