Slavek v. Hinkle

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6433
ROBERT JOSEPH SLAVEK,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
GEORGE HINKLE, Warden Greensville Correctional
Center,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
Judge. (CA-03-1439)
Submitted: December 28, 2005 Decided: February 24, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Joseph Slavek, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Robert Joseph Slavek seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(2000). 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 both
that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims
is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings
by the district court are also debatable or wrong. 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 Slavek
has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Slavek’s
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 -