Kim Jessup v. R. Mitchell

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:08-cv-00481-WO-WWD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998412015] [09-8216]

Kim Jessup v. R. Mitchell

Doc. 0

Case: 09-8216 Document: 18

Date Filed: 08/26/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-8216 KIM TYRONE JESSUP, Petitioner - Appellant, v. R. DAVID MITCHELL, Superintendent, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cv-00481-WO-WWD) Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: August 26, 2010

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kim Tyrone Jessup, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-8216 Document: 18

Date Filed: 08/26/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Kim Tyrone Jessup 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. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). relief on the merits, that a When the district court denies satisfies would this standard that claims 473, by the is 484

prisoner

demonstrating district debatable

reasonable of v.

jurists the

find

court's or

assessment Slack

constitutional 529 U.S.

wrong.

McDaniel,

(2000); see Miller-El v. 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. at 484-85. that We have independently has not made reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. the record and

conclude

Jessup

requisite

showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma oral pauperis, argument and dismiss the the appeal. and We legal

dispense

with

because

facts

2

Case: 09-8216 Document: 18

Date Filed: 08/26/2010

Page: 3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3