Morris v. Virginia Department of Corrections , 194 F. App'x 152 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7045
    LESTER LEE MORRIS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
    District Judge. (1:05-cv-01375-CMH)
    Submitted:   August 4, 2006                 Decided:   August 14, 2006
    Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Lester Lee Morris, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Lester Lee Morris 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.        
    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 Morris has not
    made the requisite showing.     Accordingly, we deny his motion for 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: 06-7045

Citation Numbers: 194 F. App'x 152

Judges: King, Shedd, Duncan

Filed Date: 8/14/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024