Kevin Kesterson v. David Ballard
Filing
920100217
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7368
KEVIN ERIC KESTERSON, Petitioner Appellant, v. DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Respondent Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:08-cv-00903)
Submitted:
December 17, 2009
Decided:
February 17, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin Eric Kesterson, Appellant Pro Se. Deputy Attorney General, Charleston, Appellee.
Dawn Ellen Warfield, West Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Kevin court's order Eric Kesterson the seeks to appeal of the district
accepting
recommendation
the
magistrate
judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. or judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 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. 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 Kesterson has not made the requisite showing. certificate dispense of appealability oral argument and Accordingly, we deny a the appeal. and We legal
dismiss the
with
because
facts
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?