Aron Johnson, Jr. v. Nora Hunt

Filing 920090108

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6463

ARON JOHNSON, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. NORA HUNT, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00020-GCM)

Submitted:

October 23, 2008

Decided:

January 8, 2009

Before WILKINSON and Senior Circuit Judge.

GREGORY,

Circuit

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Aron Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Aron court's order Johnson, denying Jr., seeks on his to 28 appeal U.S.C. the district (2000)

relief

§ 2254

petition.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice See 28 U.S.C.

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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

(2000).

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 Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, and dismiss the appeal. we deny a certificate of appealability

We grant Johnson's motion to amend his

informal brief and deny his motion to amend to permit discovery. Finally, we dispense with oral argument because the facts

2

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process. DISMISSED

3