Sayre v. McBride , 208 F. App'x 268 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7542
    KENNY DREW SAYRE, SR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THOMAS MCBRIDE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
    District Judge. (5:05-cv-00183-FPS)
    Submitted: November 21, 2006              Decided:   December 4, 2006
    Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Kenny Drew Sayre, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.    Dawn Ellen Warfield,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Kenny Drew Sayre, Sr., seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge
    and dismissing as successive Sayre’s 
    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 Sayre has not
    made the requisite showing.     Accordingly, we 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: 06-7542

Citation Numbers: 208 F. App'x 268

Judges: Traxler, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/4/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024