Simmons v. Warden O'Brien , 267 F. App'x 264 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7638
VINCENT L. SIMMONS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN TERRY O’BRIEN; UNITED STATES PAROLE
COMMISSION,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:07-cv-00193-jlk)
Submitted: February 21, 2008 Decided: February 27, 2008
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent L. Simmons, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant
United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Vincent L. Simmons, a District of Columbia 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 Simmons 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
*
Because Simmons was convicted in a District of Columbia
court, he is required to obtain a certificate of appealability in
order to appeal the denial of his § 2241 petition. See Madley v.
United States Parole Comm’n, 278 F.3d 1306 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
- 2 -