Fuller v. Kelly , 358 F. App'x 438 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7311
    RODNEY L. FULLER,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    LORETTA KELLY, Warden,
    Defendant – Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.  Samuel G. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:09-cv-00117-sgw-mfu)
    Submitted:    December 14, 2009             Decided:   December 29, 2009
    Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Rodney L. Fuller, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Rodney L. Fuller seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order    dismissing       as     untimely         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).           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.           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          that
    Fuller 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: 09-7311

Citation Numbers: 358 F. App'x 438

Judges: Motz, King, Duncan

Filed Date: 12/29/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024