Sharikas v. Kelly , 294 F. App'x 20 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6738
    CHRISTOPHER N. SHARIKAS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    LORETTA K. KELLY,
    Respondent - Appellee,
    and
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
    Respondent.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.    Claude M. Hilton, Senior
    District Judge. (1:07-cv-00537-CMH-TCB)
    Submitted:   September 16, 2008        Decided:   September 22, 2008
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Matthew McGavock Robinson, ROBINSON & BRANDT, PSC, Covington,
    Kentucky; Jennifer T. Stanton, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant.
    Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,
    Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Christopher N. Sharikas seeks to appeal the district
    court’s order dismissing his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000) petition as
    untimely.    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 Sharikas 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: 08-6738

Citation Numbers: 294 F. App'x 20

Judges: Motz, Per Curiam, Shedd, Traxler

Filed Date: 9/22/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023