LeSane v. Kenworthy , 269 F. App'x 299 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7762
    GEORGE LESANE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN GEORGE KENWORTHY,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.  James C. Dever III,
    District Judge. (5:06-hc-02184-D)
    Submitted:   February 22, 2008             Decided:   March 5, 2008
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    George LeSane, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, NORTH CAROLINA
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    George LeSane seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    dismissing as untimely 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 LeSane 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: 07-7762

Citation Numbers: 269 F. App'x 299

Judges: Motz, Per Curiam, Shedd, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 3/5/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023