Henry Perry-Bey v. Gene Johnson
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
HENRY PERRY-BEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GENE JOHNSON, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-00963-JCC-TRJ)
June 17, 2010
June 24, 2010
Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Henry Perry-Bey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Henry Perry-Bey seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his pleading construed as a motion for
reconsideration of the 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." (2006). prisoner reasonable 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)
When the district court denies relief on the merits, a satisfies jurists this would standard find that by the demonstrating district that
assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). denies relief both on procedural the When the district court the prisoner ruling must is
debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. We have independently reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. record and conclude that
Perry-Bey has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we We
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?