Furtado v. State of Maryland , 272 F. App'x 240 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7712
EDSON FURTADO,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MARYLAND; CLIFTON T. PERKINS HOSPITAL CENTER; MARYLAND
DEPT. OF HEALTH & MENTAL HYGIENE,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:07-cv-
02472-RWT)
Submitted: March 27, 2008 Decided: April 3, 2008
Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edson Furtado, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edson Furtado, a state pretrial detainee, seeks to appeal
the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241(2000) petition and his motion to alter or amend. The orders are
not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 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 petitioner 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. 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 Furtado has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal. Furtado’s motion for
appointment of counsel is denied. 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 -