Goode v. Warden, Wallens Ridge State Prison , 280 F. App'x 266 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6218
    SHAUN A. GOODE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN, WALLENS RIDGE STATE PRISON,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
    Judge. (7:07-cv-00508-jct-mfu)
    Submitted:    May 29, 2008                   Decided:   June 5, 2008
    Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Shaun A. Goode, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Beatty Martin, Senior
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Shaun A. Goode 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 Goode 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: 08-6218

Citation Numbers: 280 F. App'x 266

Judges: Traxler, Gregory, Shedd

Filed Date: 6/5/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024