Anthony Kelly v. Bobby Shearin
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ANTHONY KELLY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:09-cv-02241-AW)
February 25, 2010
March 9, 2010
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Kelly, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Anthony Kelly seeks to appeal the district court's
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). 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
constitutional prisoner reasonable
right." this would by
§ 2253(c)(2) by any
demonstrating assessment is of
wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See 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 Kelly has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability, deny Kelly's renewed motion for release pending appeal and his motion to schedule oral argument, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal 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?