Filed: Oct. 23, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7125 CHRIS JETER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM WHITE, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (4:06-cv-00424-HMH) Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 23, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNC
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7125 CHRIS JETER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM WHITE, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (4:06-cv-00424-HMH) Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 23, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCA..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7125
CHRIS JETER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM WHITE, Warden of Broad River
Correctional Institution; HENRY MCMASTER,
Attorney General of South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (4:06-cv-00424-HMH)
Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 23, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chris Jeter, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Chris Jeter seeks to appeal the district court’s order
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as successive. 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 Jeter 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 -