David Golden v. Bobby Shearin, No. 13-7839 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7839 DAVID DAVON GOLDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN BOBBY SHEARIN; THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. No. 14-6213 DAVID DAVON GOLDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN BOBBY SHEARIN; THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:11-cv-00086-PJM) Submitted: March 26, 2014 Decided: April 1, 2014 Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Davon Golden, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: David Davon Golden seeks to appeal the district court s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. not appealable unless a circuit certificate of appealability. certificate of justice or The orders are judge issues 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). appealability will not issue absent a A a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). on the merits, demonstrating district that court s debatable or a When the district court denies relief prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. satisfies Slack jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find constitutional 529 U.S. by that the claims is 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 Golden has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Golden s motion to appoint counsel, deny Golden s motion for a hearing en banc, deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 3 We dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and legal materials before this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 4
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.
