Blount v. Johnson , 121 F. App'x 502 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-7626
    DONNELL J. BLOUNT, SR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director       of   the   Virginia
    Department of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (CA-04-119-2)
    Submitted:   January 27, 2005               Decided:   February 4, 2005
    Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Donnell J. Blount, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Stephen R. McCullough,
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Donnell J. Blount, Sr., a state prisoner, seeks to appeal
    the district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed
    under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000), 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    his
    constitutional     claims   are   debatable        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 (2003); Slack
    v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    ,
    683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and
    conclude   that    Blount   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: 04-7626

Citation Numbers: 121 F. App'x 502

Judges: Luttig, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 2/4/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024