Edgar Birch v. Warden Okaloosa Correctional I
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
EDGAR JOSEPH BIRCH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN OKALOOSA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee, and GREENVILLE COUNTY SOUTH CAROLINA; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondents.
EDGAR JOSEPH BIRCH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN OKALOOSA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee, and
SOUTH CAROLINA PICKENS COUNTY; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondents.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (2:07-cv-03207-GRA; 2:07-cv-03206-GRA)
June 9, 2008
June 26, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edgar Joseph Birch, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM: Edgar Joseph Birch seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)
petitions. or judge
The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice 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). We have
independently reviewed the records and conclude that Birch has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeals. 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.
- 3 -
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?