Haneef Rashe'd v. Gene Johnson

Filing 920091023

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6380 HANEEF KHALIL RASHE'D, Petitioner Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director; MANAGER SERVICE; HELEN FAHEY, Parole Board, Respondents Appellees. AT COURT AND LEGAL Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:08-cv-00040-GBL-TRJ) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 23, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Haneef Khalil Rashe'd, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Haneef Khalil Rashe'd seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2006). issue absent "a A certificate of appealability will not showing U.S.C. standard find the that of the denial of a A that the or substantial 28 constitutional prisoner reasonable right." this would by 2253(c)(2) by any (2006). satisfies jurists demonstrating assessment is of constitutional claims district court debatable 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 Rashe'd has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Rashe'd's motion for a certificate of appealability 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?