Michael Hankins v. Carole Wallace

Filing 920080918

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6159

MICHAEL EDWARDS HANKINS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CAROLE F. WALLACE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00485-jlk-mfu)

Submitted:

September 8, 2008

Decided:

September 18, 2008

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Edwards Hankins, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Michael Edwards Hankins* seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.

issues

§ 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. 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, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hankins has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

Although it appears from the pleadings Hankins has filed that his middle name is "Edward," the district court's docket and memorandum opinion spell Hankins' middle name as "Edwards." For consistency, we have retained that latter spelling on our docket and in this opinion. 2

*

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED

3