Marcus Hunter v. Gene Johnson
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
MARCUS HUNTER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. F. Bradford Stillman, Magistrate Judge. (2:07-cv-00269-FBS)
October 21, 2008
October 24, 2008
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marcus Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Rosemary Virginia Bourne, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Marcus Hunter seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as
untimely. or judge
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). issue absent "a
A certificate of appealability will not showing U.S.C. standard find that of the denial of a A that the
constitutional prisoner reasonable
right." this would
§ 2253(c)(2) by any
demonstrating assessment of
constitutional claims by the magistrate judge is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the
magistrate judge 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
Hunter has not made the requisite showing. a certificate with of appealability argument and
Accordingly, we deny the appeal. and We legal
This case was decided by the magistrate judge upon consent of the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73.
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?