Michael Yates v. Keith Davis

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998180033-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 1:08-cv-01284-TSE-IDD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998465018] [09-7474]

Download PDF
Michael Yates v. Keith Davis Doc. 0 Case: 09-7474 Document: 12 Date Filed: 11/15/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7474 MICHAEL A. YATES, Petitioner Appellant, v. KEITH DAVIS, Warden, Respondent Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-01284-TSE-IDD) Submitted: November 5, 2010 GREGORY, Decided: Circuit November 15, 2010 and HAMILTON, Before WILKINSON and Senior Circuit Judge. Judges, Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael A. Yates, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 09-7474 Document: 12 Date Filed: 11/15/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Michael A. Yates seeks to appeal the district court's order 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 of the denial of a substantial constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. 529 U.S. at 484-85. and conclude that we Slack, We have independently reviewed the record Yates has not made the for requisite a showing. of Accordingly, deny Yates' motion certificate appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 Case: 09-7474 Document: 12 Date Filed: 11/15/2010 Page: 3 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?