Delahoussaye v. Burtt , 274 F. App'x 318 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7226
    RALPH DELAHOUSSAYE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    STAN BURTT, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Beaufort.    Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (9:07-cv-00385-HMH)
    Submitted:   April 17, 2008                 Decided:   April 21, 2008
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ralph Delahoussaye, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, SOUTH
    CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ralph Delahoussaye seeks to appeal the district court’s
    orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition and denying
    reconsideration.   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 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 Delahoussaye
    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: 07-7226

Citation Numbers: 274 F. App'x 318

Judges: Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Michael

Filed Date: 4/21/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024