Ocampo v. Harkleroad ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6089
    ALFREDO CESMAS OCAMPO,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    SIDNEY HARKLEROAD,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief
    District Judge. (1:06-cv-00527-JAB-WW)
    Submitted:   August 23, 2007                 Decided:   August 28, 2007
    Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Alfredo Cesmas Ocampo, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge,
    III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina,
    for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Alfredo   Cesmas     Ocampo   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 Ocampo has not
    made the requisite showing.          Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed
    in    forma    pauperis,    deny     the    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: 07-6089

Judges: Williams, Wilkins, Hamilton

Filed Date: 8/28/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024