Thomas v. Johnson , 256 F. App'x 600 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-7189
    WADDELL MAURICE FOX,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia D.O.C,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.  T.S. Ellis, III, Senior
    District Judge. (1:07-cv-00546-TSE)
    Submitted:   November 20, 2007           Decided:   November 29, 2007
    Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Waddell Maurice Fox, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Waddell Maurice Fox 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 Fox has not
    made the requisite showing.   Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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: 07-7189

Citation Numbers: 256 F. App'x 600

Judges: Gregory, Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Traxler

Filed Date: 11/29/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023