Banks v. Johnson ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6795
    CHRISTOPHER BANKS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE JOHNSON, Director of D.O.C.,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
    Judge. (1:06-cv-00988-LMB)
    Submitted:   December 20, 2007         Decided:     December 27, 2007
    Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Christopher Banks, Appellant Pro Se. Alice T. Armstrong, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Christopher Banks seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition.                  The
    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
    certificate of appealability.        See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000).
    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)   (2000).      A   prisoner   satisfies      this   standard     by
    demonstrating    that    reasonable      jurists    would     find    that     any
    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is
    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the   district   court   is   likewise   debatable.         See    Miller-El    v.
    Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Banks
    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 contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-6795

Filed Date: 12/27/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014