Morrow v. Harkleroad ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6715
JODY LARRY MORROW,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
SIDNEY HARKLEROAD, Marion Correctional
Institution; ROY A. COOPER, III, Attorney
General of North Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Bryson City. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (CA-02-142-2)
Submitted: September 12, 2003 Decided: October 10, 2003
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ann Bach Petersen, James Richard Glover, GLOVER & PETERSEN, P.A.,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jody Larry Morrow appeals from the order of the district court
denying relief on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). In reviewing the denial of a
§ 2254 petition, this Court may only grant a certificate of
appealability if the appellant makes a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The
relevant inquiry is whether “‘reasonable jurists would find the
district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable
or wrong.’” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct.
1029, 1040 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000)). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Morrow has failed to make this 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