Boger v. Smith , 275 F. App'x 262 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6164
    DERRICK D. BOGER,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    BOB SMITH, SUPT.,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
    District Judge. (1:07-cv-00044-NTC-RAE)
    Submitted:   April 24, 2008                 Decided:   April 29, 2008
    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Derrick D. Boger, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
    Assistant Attorney General, Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney
    General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Derrick D. Boger seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on 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 Boger has not
    made the requisite showing.       Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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: 08-6164

Citation Numbers: 275 F. App'x 262

Judges: King, Per Curiam, Shedd, Wilkins

Filed Date: 4/29/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024