Martin v. Keen Mountain Correctional Center , 257 F. App'x 635 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6999
    VISTON SHYROCK MARTIN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    WARDEN, KEEN MOUNTAIN CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.   Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
    District Judge. (7:07-cv-00067-jlk)
    Submitted:   November 19, 2007            Decided:   December 6, 2007
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Viston Shyrock Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Karri B. Atwood, OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Viston   Shyrock   Martin    seeks   to   appeal     the     district
    court’s order 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.         See    
    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.       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
    , 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Martin
    has not made the requisite showing.              Accordingly, we deny a
    certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally,
    we deny Martin’s motion for appointment of counsel.                   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: 07-6999

Citation Numbers: 257 F. App'x 635

Judges: Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Duncan

Filed Date: 12/6/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024