Cook v. US Parole Commission

Filing 920071227

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7278

WILLIAM L. COOK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE HOLLINGSWORTH, Warden, COMMISSION; LISA Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (8:07-cv-00274-DKC)

Submitted:

December 10, 2007

Decided:

December 27, 2007

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William L. Cook, Appellant Pro Se. James A. Frederick, GOODELL, DEVRIES, LEECH & DANN, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland; Allen F. Loucks, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: William L. Cook, a District of Columbia Code offender housed in a federal prison, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (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); see

Madley v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C. Cir. 2002). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." § 2253(c)(2) (2000). that A prisoner satisfies would this 28 U.S.C. standard that by any

demonstrating

reasonable

jurists

find

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 Cook has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of We dispense with oral

appealability and dismiss the appeal.

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 -