Filed: Aug. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6334 ROBERT JOE MCNEMAR, Petitioner - Appellant, v. RALPH TERRY, Acting Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00108-JPB) Submitted: July 31, 2018 Decided: August 17, 2018 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6334 ROBERT JOE MCNEMAR, Petitioner - Appellant, v. RALPH TERRY, Acting Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00108-JPB) Submitted: July 31, 2018 Decided: August 17, 2018 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6334
ROBERT JOE MCNEMAR,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
RALPH TERRY, Acting Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia,
at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00108-JPB)
Submitted: July 31, 2018 Decided: August 17, 2018
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Joe McNemar, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Joe McNemar seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 McNemar has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant McNemar’s motion for
leave to file supplemental argument, we deny his motions for a certificate of appealability
and for 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
2