Jerry Hines v. Butch Jackson

Filing 920100225

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7256 JERRY HINES, Petitioner Appellant, v. BUTCH JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cv-00357-GCM) Submitted: February 9, 2010 Decided: February 25, 2010 Before MOTZ, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jerry Hines seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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). demonstrating that A prisoner satisfies this standard by jurists would find that any reasonable assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 537 court U.S. is likewise 336-38 debatable. (2003); See Slack Miller-El v. v. Cockrell, 322, McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). conclude that We have independently reviewed the record and Hines 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 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?