Jerry Killen v. Bryan Watson
Filing
920091117
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6409
JERRY GLENN KILLEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRYAN WATSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:08-cv-00025-jct-mfu)
Submitted:
November 2, 2009
Decided:
November 17, 2009
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerry Glenn Killen, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Jerry court's order petition. Glenn denying Killen relief seeks on his to 28 appeal U.S.C. the district (2006)
§ 2254
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice See 28 U.S.C.
or judge issues a certificate of appealability. § 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 Killen has not made the requisite showing. motion appeal. legal before for a certificate of Accordingly, we deny the and dismiss the
appealability
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional
contentions the court
would
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?