Lance v. Lamanna

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6945
ROBERT M. LANCE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JOHN LAMANNA, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(4:04-cv-02247-DCN)
Submitted: July 25, 2006 Decided: August 3, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert M. Lance, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Robert M. Lance, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241(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 Lance 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
*
We further reject Lance’s contention that the magistrate
judge lacked jurisdiction to make a recommendation to the district
court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
- 2 -