Filed: Sep. 18, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6415 CHRIS B. SMITH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Director; VIRGINIA, Commonwealth of, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:06-cv-00433-JLK) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 18, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dism
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6415 CHRIS B. SMITH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GENE M. JOHNSON, Director; VIRGINIA, Commonwealth of, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:06-cv-00433-JLK) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 18, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6415
CHRIS B. SMITH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
GENE M. JOHNSON, Director; VIRGINIA,
Commonwealth of,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:06-cv-00433-JLK)
Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 18, 2007
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chris B. Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chris B. Smith, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order denying relief on 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 Smith 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 -