Stacey v. Johnson ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7455
    SPENCER LAMONT STACEY,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE JOHNSON, Director; B. WATSON,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.  Samuel G. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:09-cv-00317-sgw-mfu)
    Submitted:    January 19, 2010               Decided:   January 27, 2010
    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Spencer Lamont Stacey, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Spencer      Lamont       Stacey      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.         
    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.                     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 Stacey 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: 09-7455

Judges: Niemeyer, King, Davis

Filed Date: 1/27/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024