Chris Drye v. Alvin Keller, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
CHRIS DARRYL DRYE, Petitioner Appellant, v. ALVIN KELLER, JR., Respondent Appellee, and THEODIS BECK, Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:09-cv-00118-WO-DPD)
March 16, 2010
March 22, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chris Darryl Drye, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Chris Darryl Drye seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. (2006). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)
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
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 322, likewise 336-38 debatable. (2003); Slack Miller-El v. v.
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 Drye has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Drye's motions to appoint counsel, for a transcript at government expense, and for
documentation of response, and dismiss the appeal.
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
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?