Nabil Aissi v. Jeffrey Crawford, No. 13-7426 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7426 NABIL AISSI, Petitioner - Appellant, v. JEFFREY CRAWFORD, Warden, Farmville Immigration Detention Center; JOHN MORTON, Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; THOMAS HOMAN, Executive Associate Director, Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; MATTHEW MUNROE, Director, Washington Field Office, Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; ERIC H. HOLDER, U.S. Attorney General; JANET NAPOLITANO, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (3:13-cv-00425-JRS) Submitted: November 19, 2013 Before WYNN and Circuit Judge. FLOYD, Decided: November 22, 2013 Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON Virginia, for Appellant. & ASSOCIATES, PC, Arlington, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nabil Aissi seeks to appeal the district court s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. or judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). issue absent a appealability. 28 U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right. of 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. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 Cockrell, (2000); (2003). see Miller-El v. 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 Aissi has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3