Albert v. Director, Department of Corrections , 229 F. App'x 209 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-7868
    NORMAN WESTLEY BRANCH,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.  Henry E. Hudson, District
    Judge. (3:06-cv-00010-HEH)
    Submitted:   May 9, 2007                   Decided:   June 13, 2007
    Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Norman Westley Branch, Appellant Pro Se.   Donald Eldridge Jeffrey,
    III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL        OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,
    Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Norman     Westley   Branch     seeks   to    appeal   the    district
    court’s order denying relief on his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (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 Branch has not
    made the requisite showing.        Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability and dismiss the appeal. We grant the motion to amend
    the preliminary informal brief and 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: 06-7868

Citation Numbers: 229 F. App'x 209

Judges: Duncan, Michael, Per Curiam, Williams

Filed Date: 6/13/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023