Harris v. Johnson , 352 F. App'x 838 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-6326
    KEITH EMMANDER HARRIS,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Department of Corrections,
    Respondent – Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.   Liam O’Grady, District
    Judge. (1:08-cv-00397-LO-TRJ)
    Submitted:    November 2, 2009              Decided:   November 16, 2009
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Keith Emmander Harris, Appellant Pro Se.      Donald Eldridge
    Jeffrey, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Keith    Emmander       Harris       seeks   to        appeal   the   district
    court’s    order    denying    relief       on    his    
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
        (2006)
    petition.     The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
    or judge issues a certificate of appealability.                             See 
    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.                 See 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 Harris
    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: 09-6326

Citation Numbers: 352 F. App'x 838

Judges: King, Motz, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 11/16/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023