Matthews v. Johnson , 235 F. App'x 98 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6512
    NEIL C. MATTHEWS,
    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. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District
    Judge. (2:06-cv-00173)
    Submitted: July 24, 2007                        Decided:   July 31, 2007
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Neil C. Matthews, Appellant Pro Se. Alice T. Armstrong, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Neil C. Matthews seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition.                   The order
    is 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 Matthews has
    not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate
    of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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: 07-6512

Citation Numbers: 235 F. App'x 98

Judges: Wilkinson, Traxler, Duncan

Filed Date: 7/31/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024