Jackson v. Smith ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                 UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6932
    ANTONIO BENJAMIN JACKSON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    JAMES SMITH; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF
    MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.     Peter J. Messitte, District Judge.
    (8:06-cv-03264-PJM)
    Submitted:   August 6, 2007                 Decided:   August 13, 2007
    Before MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Antonio Benjamin Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland,
    for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Antonio Benjamin Jackson seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order dismissing as untimely 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 Jackson 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: 07-6932

Judges: Motz, Per Curiam, Traxler, Wilkins

Filed Date: 8/13/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024