Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Harris Ford v. Patsy Chavis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Harris Emanuel Ford's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as successive. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and denied Ford a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Ford's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-11-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-7287

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Harris Emanuel Ford's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as successive. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and denied Ford a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Ford's appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Harris Ford v. Patsy Chavis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Harris Emanuel Ford's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as successive. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and denied Ford a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Ford'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    UNPUBLISHED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. 14-7287

    HARRIS EMANUEL FORD,


    Petitioner Appellant,
    v.
    PATSY CHAVIS,
    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. (5:13-hc-02268-D)

    Submitted:

    November 6, 2014

    Decided:

    November 13, 2014

    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Harris Emanuel Ford, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Harris

    Emanuel

    Ford

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2012) petition as


    successive.
    justice

    or

    The

    order

    is

    judge

    issues

    not

    appealable

    certificate

    U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

    of

    unless

    circuit

    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) (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 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 Ford 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

    You might also like