Anthony Foster v. George Snyder

Filing 920090409

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8037

ANTHONY C. FOSTER, Petitioner ­ Appellant, v. GEORGE SNYDER, Respondent ­ Appellee, and U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:07-hc-02172-BO)

Submitted:

March 19, 2009

Decided:

April 9, 2009

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony C. Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Anthony C. Foster, originally convicted and sentenced in the superior court of the District of Columbia, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition challenging of his the United The or States order Parole is not a

Commission's appealable

revocation unless a

parole. justice

circuit

judge

issues

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); see Madley v. United States Parole Comm'n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C. Cir. 2002). 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) (2006). this standard by demonstrating that A prisoner satisfies jurists would

reasonable

find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Foster has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

2

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED

3