Dillard Booker v. Gene Johnson
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
DILLARD J. BOOKER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Corrections, Director of the Virginia Department of
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:08-cv-00507-RAJ-JEB)
December 15, 2009
December 21, 2009
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dillard J. Booker, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Mozley Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Dillard J. Booker seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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. A certificate of appealability 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). will not issue absent "a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. by § 2253(c)(2) (2006). that A prisoner satisfies would this find
that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 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). that We have independently has not made reviewed the the record and
Booker we deny
showing. at and
dismiss the appeal. facts and legal before
We dispense with oral argument because the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the
contentions the court
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?