Tisdale v. Beck

Filing 920070212

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7891 IVORY JOE TISDALE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:06-cv-00555-JAB) Submitted: January 29, 2007 Decided: February 12, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ivory Joe Tisdale, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ivory Joe Tisdale seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing 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). record and conclude that We have independently reviewed the has not made the requisite Tisdale showing. Accordingly, we deny Tisdale's motions for a certificate of appealability and appointment of counsel, 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 -

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?