Gordon v. Pinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
GREGORY LYNN GORDON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TODD PINION, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District District of North Carolina, at Durham. District Judge. (CA-04-1212-1)
Court for the Middle James A. Beaty, Jr.,
August 25, 2006
September 14, 2006
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gregory Lynn Gordon, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Gregory Lynn Gordon seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. This
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." § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this 28 U.S.C. standard by
demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims 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 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gordon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Gordon's motion
for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Gordon's motion for en banc consideration. We dispense with oral argument because See Fed. R. App. P. 35. the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?