Young v. Rushton , 234 F. App'x 118 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-8049
CHARLES B. YOUNG,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
COLIE L. RUSHTON, McCI; HENRY MCMASTER,
Attorney General for South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (9:06-cv-00369-GRA)
Submitted: June 20, 2007 Decided: July 20, 2007
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles B. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Young seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and denying his
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration. Neither order is
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 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. 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 Young 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 -