Edwards v. Meeks , 260 F. App'x 569 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7554
    IRA WENDELL EDWARDS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    EDDIE W. MEEKS, Superintendent,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
    District Judge. (3:07-cv-00011-RLW)
    Submitted:   December 20, 2007         Decided:     December 28, 2007
    Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ira Wendell Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ira Wendell Edwards 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 Edwards has not
    made the requisite showing.       Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny
    Edwards’ motion for appointment of counsel, 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: 07-7554

Citation Numbers: 260 F. App'x 569

Judges: Michael, King, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/28/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024