Brown v. City of Virginia Beach , 260 F. App'x 540 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7402
    MICHAEL JOHN BROWN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-00245-RBS)
    Submitted:   December 20, 2007          Decided:    December 28, 2007
    Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Michael John Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Michael John Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order dismissing his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition without
    prejudice because he failed to comply with the court’s order to pay
    the required filing fee.             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     Brown   has    not    made    the    requisite         showing.
    Accordingly,      we    deny    Brown’s     motion    for       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: 07-7402

Citation Numbers: 260 F. App'x 540

Judges: Michael, King, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/28/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024