History
  • No items yet
midpage
Robert Haughie v. David Blumberg
684 F. App'x 302
| 4th Cir. | 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Haughie, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

Robert Haughie, a state prisoner , appeals the district court’s order denying relief in Haughie’s action seeking medical parole and damages. We affirm in part and dismiss in part.

To the extent that Haughie seeks medical parole, the district court’s denial of relief 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 Haughie has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in part.

As to Haughie’s appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claims for monetary damages, we have reviewed the record and find that Haughie failed to demonstrate that he is entitled to relief. Accordingly, we affirm this portion of the district court’s order. 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.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART

Case Details

Case Name: Robert Haughie v. David Blumberg
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Apr 5, 2017
Citation: 684 F. App'x 302
Docket Number: 16-7465
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.