Edgens v. Bazzle , 346 F. App'x 909 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-6678
    JACKIE B. EDGENS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    E. RICHARD BAZZLE, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia.     Margaret B. Seymour, District
    Judge. (3:08-cv-00290-MBS)
    Submitted:    September 28, 2009            Decided:   October 7, 2009
    Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jackie B. Edgens, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
    Assistant Attorney General, Samuel Creighton Waters, Assistant
    Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Jackie B. Edgens seeks to appeal the district court’s
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    dismissing as untimely his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2006) petition.
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues a certificate of appealability.                   
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1)
    (2006).    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)       (2006).        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    Edgens      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: 09-6678

Citation Numbers: 346 F. App'x 909

Judges: Agee, Hamilton, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 10/7/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023