Albert Tyrone Johnson v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6138
ALBERT TYRONE JOHNSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 11-6403
ALBERT TYRONE JOHNSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cv-01297-CMH-IDD)
Submitted: November 10, 2011 Decided: November 17, 2011
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert Tyrone Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Albert Tyrone Johnson
seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition (No. 11-6138) and its order
denying leave to appeal in forma pauperis in appeal No. 11-6138
(No. 11-6403). In No. 11-6138, the district court’s order is
not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
(2006). 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 Johnson has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss
the appeal in No. 11-6138.

-- 3 of 4 --

4
Turning to appeal No. 11-6403, the denial of in forma
pauperis status is immediately appealable. Roberts v. U.S.
Dist. Ct., 339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950) (per curiam). Because this
court granted Johnson leave to appeal in forma pauperis in No.
11-6138, we dismiss the appeal in No. 11-6403 as moot.
See Incumaa v. Ozmint, 507 F.3d 281, 286 (4th Cir. 2007)
(setting forth the principles of appellate mootness). 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

-- 4 of 4 --