Daniel Kinard v. Terry O'Brien
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
DANIEL W. KINARD, Petitioner Appellant, v. TERRY O'BRIEN, 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-00601-jlk-mfu)
October 14, 2008
October 20, 2008
Before KING, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Daniel W. Kinard, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Daniel W. Kinard, a prisoner in federal custody
serving a sentence imposed by the District of Columbia, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. unless a circuit justice or
The order is not appealable judge issues a certificate of
appealability. United 2002). States
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); see Madley v. Parole Comm'n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C. Cir.
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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong, and 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 record and conclude that
Kinard has not made the requisite showing. a certificate with of appealability argument and
Accordingly, we deny the appeal. and We 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?