Marqueion Harrison v. Willie Davis, No. 12-6086 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6086 MARQUEION JAMAL HARRISON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WILLIE DAVIS, Respondent Appellee, and HALIFAX COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:10-hc-02235-FL) Submitted: May 24, 2012 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. DAVIS, Decided: Circuit Judges, and June 12, 2012 HAMILTON, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marqueion Assistant Appellee. Harrison, Attorney Appellant Pro Se. General, Raleigh, Mary Carla Hollis, North Carolina, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marqueion Jamal Harrison seeks to appeal the district court s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. petition. (2006) The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). issue § 2254 absent a A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. showing of the denial 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). of a 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. 484 (2000); (2003). see Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, Miller-El v. Cockrell, 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 Harrison has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motion for appointment of counsel, motion for bail or release pending appeal, and supplemental motion for bail or release pending appeal, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 2 facts and materials legal before contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
