Robison v. Hinkle , 357 F. App'x 517 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-6965
    ROBERT RAYMOND ROBISON, JR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GEORGE HINKLE, Chief Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.   T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
    District Judge. (1:08-cv-01140-TSE-TCB)
    Submitted:    November 19, 2009             Decided:   December 18, 2009
    Before SHEDD and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Robert Raymond Robison, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Robert    Raymond       Robison,       Jr.,     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).           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 Robison
    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: 09-6965

Citation Numbers: 357 F. App'x 517

Judges: Shedd, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/18/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024