Taylor v. McBride , 163 F. App'x 244 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 05-7456
    DONALD LEE TAYLOR, JR.,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THOMAS MCBRIDE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. W. Craig Broadwater,
    District Judge. (CA-04-46)
    Submitted: January 19, 2006                 Decided:   January 25, 2006
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Donald Lee Taylor, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Donald Lee Taylor seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order adopting the recommendation of a magistrate and denying
    relief on his petition filed under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000).                   An
    appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding
    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 his constitutional claims are debatable and
    that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are
    also debatable or wrong.      See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    ,
    336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v.
    Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    , 683 (4th Cir. 2001).               We have independently
    reviewed the record and conclude that Taylor 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: 05-7456

Citation Numbers: 163 F. App'x 244

Judges: Per Curiam, Shedd, Traxler, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 1/25/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023