# Marcus Brown v. Dennis Daniels

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · October 24, 2014 · 585 F. App'x 82

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745516

## Case

- **Full name:** Marcus Randall BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis DANIELS, Administrator, Maury Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 24, 2014
- **Citations:** 585 F. App'x 82
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Shedd, Duncan, Floyd
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745516

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6840

MARCUS RANDALL BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

DENNIS DANIELS, Administrator, Maury Correctional
Institution,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (5:13-cv-00107-RJC)

Submitted: October 21, 2014 Decided: October 24, 2014

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marcus Randall Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Marcus Randall Brown seeks to appeal the district

court’s orders dismissing as time-barred his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2012) petition and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to

alter or amend judgment. The orders are 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).

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 Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2745516. Public record. Not legal advice.