Jones v. Wendt

Filing 920061018

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6268

DEMETRIUS JONES, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus KEVIN WENDT, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:05-cv-00053-IMK)

Submitted:

October 4, 2006

Decided:

October 18, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Demetrius Jones, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Betsy S. Jividen, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Demetrius Jones, Jr., a prisoner in custody under a sentence imposed by a Superior Court of the District of Columbia, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336

(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 Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, We

deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal.

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 -