Hayes v. Johnson , 100 F. App'x 942 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-6551
    SERGIO EMMANUEL HAYES,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE JOHNSON,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (CA-02-1257-AM)
    Submitted:   June 10, 2004                 Decided:   June 21, 2004
    Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Sergio Emmanuel Hayes, Appellant Pro Se.      John H. McLees, Jr.,
    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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
    Sergio   Emmanuel     Hayes   seeks     to   appeal        the    district
    court’s order 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 Hayes 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: 04-6551

Citation Numbers: 100 F. App'x 942

Judges: Hamilton, Per Curiam, Traxler, Williams

Filed Date: 6/21/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023