McClain v. McBride , 160 F. App'x 323 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-6968
    WILLIE MCGEE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THOMAS MCBRIDE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph Robert Goodwin,
    District Judge. (CA-03-2124)
    Submitted: December 22, 2005              Decided:   December 30, 2005
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Willie McGee, Appellant Pro Se. Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., Dawn Ellen
    Warfield, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA,
    Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Willie    McGee    seeks    to     appeal   the   district      court’s
    judgment adopting and affirming the magistrate judge’s report and
    recommendation and 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.        
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(l) (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 both
    that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims
    is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings
    by   the    district     court    are    also     debatable     or   wrong.        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 McGee has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly,
    we deny McGee’s motion for 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: 05-6968

Citation Numbers: 160 F. App'x 323

Judges: Widener, Niemeyer, King

Filed Date: 12/30/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024