Freeman v. Angelone , 145 F. App'x 416 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-6541
    NEAPOLEON JUAN FREEMAN, Pharaoh, Diplomat,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE, Division of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
    Judge. (CA-04-1197)
    Submitted:   September 29, 2005           Decided:   October 6, 2005
    Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Neapoleon Juan Freeman, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Neapoleon Juan Freeman seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order dismissing without prejudice, his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
    (2000) petition as untimely.            This 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    the     district      court’s      assessment        of     his
    constitutional      claims      is    debatable    and    that    any    dispositive
    procedural findings by the district court are also debatable or
    wrong.     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 (4th Cir. 2001).               We have independently reviewed the
    record   and     conclude      that   Freeman   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: 05-6541

Citation Numbers: 145 F. App'x 416

Judges: Wilkinson, King, Gregory

Filed Date: 10/6/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024