Lewis v. Jackson ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-6788
    JOHN LAMONT LEWIS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    HERB JACKSON,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Asheville.   Graham C. Mullen,
    Senior District Judge. (1:10-cv-00091-GCM)
    Submitted:   July 27, 2010                 Decided:   August 9, 2010
    Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit
    Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John Lamont Lewis, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    John Lamont Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2006) 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) (2006).             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) (2006).                   When the
    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
    this    standard     by    demonstrating         that     reasonable      jurists     would
    find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
    claims is debatable or wrong.                Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 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    Lewis     has     not   made     the    requisite       showing.
    Accordingly,       we     deny    Lewis’s        motion     for    a     certificate      of
    appealability and dismiss the appeal.                       We dispense with oral
    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    2
    presented in the materials before the court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-6788

Judges: Traxler, Wilkinson, Keenan

Filed Date: 8/9/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024