United States v. Johnson , 285 F. App'x 60 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                                  UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6048
    RUBEN MARTINEZ,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of
    Corrections,
    Respondent -    Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-00037-RAJ-JEB)
    Submitted:   June 19, 2008                     Decided:   June 24, 2008
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Ruben Martinez, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Misbach, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ruben Martinez 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 Martinez has not made the requisite
    showing. Accordingly, we deny Martinez’s motion for appointment of
    counsel, 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: 08-6048

Citation Numbers: 285 F. App'x 60

Judges: Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Michael

Filed Date: 6/24/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024