Conlin v. West Virginia , 209 F. App'x 353 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7797
    JEREMY CONLIN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; DOUG DRETTE, TDCJ-ID,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,
    District Judge. (2:06-cv-00636)
    Submitted: December 14, 2006              Decided:   December 22, 2006
    Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jeremy Conlin, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Jeremy Conlin seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 Conlin 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: 06-7797

Citation Numbers: 209 F. App'x 353

Judges: Gregory, Michael, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 12/22/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024